FAILS v. JONES (2018)

By habeas corpus petition, Appellant challenged his 2004 Escambia County judgment and sentence, claiming error in the witness affidavit and arrest warrant. Appellant's claims are meritless, and the lower court properly dismissed his habeas petition. We make no further comment on that.

We write, however, to address Appellant's repeated violations of this Court's orders barring him from pro se filings related to his 2004 Escambia County judgment and sentence. In 2010 this Court barred Appellant from pro se filings related to his case. Fails v. State, 46 So.3d 1032, 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (mem.). Undeterred, Appellant filed seven more cases. In 2014 this Court again sanctioned Appellant, referred him to the Department of Corrections for discipline, and warned him further violation could result in a complete pro se bar. Fails v. State, 137 So.3d 623, 623–24 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). Still undeterred, Appellant filed this meritless appeal of the lower court's proper dismissal of his habeas corpus petition. Moreover, in this appeal, Appellant has engaged in frivolous and excessive motion practice, filing at least twenty-two different motions seeking unwarranted, unavailable, and often incomprehensible relief. This Court granted none, and hereby denies all pending motions without further order or comment.

We find Appellant's present appeal frivolous. We direct a certified copy of this opinion be provided to the Department of Corrections to be forwarded to the appropriate institution or facility for disciplinary procedures pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes. As we have twice before, we bar Appellant from filing any more pleadings in this Court challenging his 2004 Escambia County judgment and sentence, unless represented by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar.

Further, in light of Appellant's repeat violations of this Court's orders, continued waste of this Court's finite resources to timely review legitimate filings, and failure to heed this Court's multiple warnings, we bar Appellant from all pro se filings in this Court, not just those directed at his 2004 Escambia County judgment and sentence. See Pettway v. McNeil, 987 So.2d 20, 22–23 (Fla. 2008) (explaining each frivolous, repetitive filing detracts from legitimate claims and litigants and drains a court's already scarce resources). We direct the Clerk of this Court not to accept any additional filings from Appellant, unless he is represented by a member in good standing of the Florida Bar.

Accordingly, as barred and unauthorized, we DISMISS Appellant's appeal, bar him from all pro se filings in this Court, and refer him to the Department for appropriate disciplinary action.

Per Curiam.

Lewis, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.