Stokes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stokes v. State

50 So. 3d 1234, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 40, 2011 WL 92772

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 12, 2011

Docket4D10-93

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 50 So. 3d 1234 (Stokes v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stokes v. State, 50 So. 3d 1234, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 40, 2011 WL 92772 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In the circuit court, the state’s response to a pro se emergency petition for writ of habeas corpus included a request for the issuance of an order prohibiting appellant from filing any further pro se pleadings in the case, pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999). Ultimately, the circuit court granted the state’s motion for a Spencer order. Appellant failed to respond to an order to show cause on the Spencer issue because he did not receive it; he established this fact through a prison log of mail received at the relevant time. As the state concedes, Spencer requires notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond before a Spencer order issues. We reverse the Spencer order and remand to the circuit court where appellant shall be given an opportunity to be heard on the Spencer issue.

GROSS, C.J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

In the circuit court, the state’s response to a pro se emergency petition for writ of habeas corpus included a request for the issuance of an order prohibiting appellant from filing any further pro se pleadings in the case, pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999). Ultimately, the circuit court granted the state’s motion for a Spencer order. Appellant failed to respond to an order to show cause on the Spencer issue because he did not receive it; he established this fact through a prison log of mail received at the relevant time. As the state concedes, Spencer requires notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond before a Spencer order issues. We reverse the Spencer order and remand to the circuit court where appellant shall be given an opportunity to be heard on the Spencer issue.

GROSS, C.J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 So. 3d 1234, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 40, 2011 WL 92772, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stokes-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack