WATSON v. STATE (2024)

ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On August 14, 2024, this court denied Todd E. Watson's petition for writ of prohibition. The court also ordered Watson to show cause why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se filings in this court relating to lower tribunal case number F17-18789.

Watson provided no response to the order to show cause. After carefully considering the record, including the myriad frivolous pro se appeals and petitions brought by Watson, which include repeated scandalous, defamatory, and unsupported allegations, we conclude that no good cause exists. This court therefore prohibits Watson from filing any additional pro se pleadings relating to circuit court case number F17-18789. See Roberts v. State, 224 So. 3d 289, 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (barring pro se party from further filings in the appellate court related to the underlying criminal matter); see also State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999) (holding that upon a demonstration of abuse, a court can restrict future pro se pleadings if it first provides a pro se litigant reasonable notice and an opportunity to respond); Concepcion v. State, 944 So. 2d 1069, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (explaining that the right to proceed pro se will be forfeited where a party abuses the judicial process by the continued filing of “successive motions which have been heard, considered, rejected, and then raised again”).

Accordingly, Watson is prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to his convictions, judgments, and sentences in lower tribunal case number F17-18789. See Cruz v. State, 981 So. 2d 1272, 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). We direct the Clerk of the Third District Court of Appeal to refuse to accept any such papers relating to this circuit court case number unless they have been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a duly licensed member of The Florida Bar in good standing. See Whipple v. State, 112 So. 3d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Johnson v. State, 915 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).

Additionally, any such further and unauthorized pro se filings by Watson may subject him to appropriate sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action, including the forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2017); Whipple, 112 So. 3d at 541 (citing Minor v. State, 963 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)).

PER CURIAM.