White v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

White v. State

946 So. 2d 131, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 493, 2007 WL 120077

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 19, 2007

DocketNo. 5D06-3808

StatusPublished

This text of 946 So. 2d 131 (White 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

White v. State, 946 So. 2d 131, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 493, 2007 WL 120077 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

White entered a plea of no contest in April, 1994, to burglary of a dwelling, aggravated assault of a person over 65 years of age, and attempted sexual battery. He did not file a direct appeal. He has filed 12 post-conviction motions and petitions, almost all of which attack his sentences. He now appeals the summary denial of his later motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because his motion is untimely and successive, we affirm. White is hereby advised that the filing of anymore successive or frivolous pleadings will result in a show cause order pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47, 48-49 (Fla.1999) (court can prohibit further pro se attacks on defendant’s conviction and sentence as sanction for prior repeated and frivolous motions after giving [132]*132him notice and reasonable opportunity to respond).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, PALMER and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

White entered a plea of no contest in April, 1994, to burglary of a dwelling, aggravated assault of a person over 65 years of age, and attempted sexual battery. He did not file a direct appeal. He has filed 12 post-conviction motions and petitions, almost all of which attack his sentences. He now appeals the summary denial of his later motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because his motion is untimely and successive, we affirm. White is hereby advised that the filing of anymore successive or frivolous pleadings will result in a show cause order pursuant to State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47, 48-49 (Fla.1999) (court can prohibit further pro se attacks on defendant’s conviction and sentence as sanction for prior repeated and frivolous motions after giving [132]*132him notice and reasonable opportunity to respond).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, PALMER and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

946 So. 2d 131, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 493, 2007 WL 120077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-state-fladistctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack