PARKS v. STATE (2012)

Roosevelt PARKS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D11–3665.

Decided: November 28, 2012

Roosevelt Parks, Raiford, pro se. No appearance required for appellee.

Defendant filed a motion for postconviction relief challenging his conviction for rape, which became final in 1970. The trial court denied the motion as untimely and successive. We affirm.

Defendant's motion did not present any valid exceptions to the time limitations under the rule. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b). Further, Defendant's motion was successive as the claims could have been raised in one of his previous motions. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1243–44 (Fla.2004).

Finally, Defendant's claim alleging deficiency in the charging instrument is frivolous. See Logan v. State, 1 So.3d 1253, 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Defendant is cautioned that abusive, repetitive, malicious, and/or other frivolous filing may result in sanctions, such as a bar on pro se filing in this court, and/or referral to prison officials for disciplinary procedures. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2012); State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.1999).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

STEVENSON, HAZOURI and GERBER, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network