BRUCE SMALL v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA (2022)

Pro se Petitioner is deemed insolvent and may proceed in forma pauperis for purposes of this cause.

Upon consideration of the pro se Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and a review of the trial court docket below, the Petition is hereby denied.

The trial court entered its order on May 17, 2022, and served the petitioner at Wakulla Correctional Institution. A copy of the trial court order is attached hereto.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL

CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO: 2021-025117-CA-01

SECTION: CA02

JUDGE: William Thomas

BRUCE L SMALL Plaintiff(s)

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA Defendant(s)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to the doctrine of res judicata. The court, having considered the motion, finds and decides that this case should be dismissed.

Plaintiff Bruce L. Small (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections and is currently housed in the Wakulla Correctional Institution Annex. See FDOC's Offender Search page, http://www.dc.state.fl.us/offendersearch/ (Bruce L. Small, DC# 082691).

In April 2006, Plaintiff was found guilty of one count of selling heroin, a second-degree felony under section 893.13(1)(A)1, Fla. Stat. Plaintiff received an enhanced sentence of 30- years due to his being classified as a habitual felony offender under section 775.084, Fla. Stat., in Miami-Dade Circuit Court case # F0435108A.

On November 3, 2021, Plaintiff filed this action, challenging section 775.084 Fla. Stat. as an unconstitutional violation of the prohibition against ex post facto laws. Plaintiff cites U.S. Const. article(s) § 1, § 9 and § 10, of which each contains a separate clause prohibiting the passage of ex post facto laws. See generally Plaintiff's Complaint.

On March 29, 2022, Defendant, the State of Florida (“Defendant”) filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, raising the doctrine of res judicata as the argument in favor of dismissal. See Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Defendant argued that Plaintiff had raised the same claims in this matter in previous cases, and those cases had all received judgments on the merits already. See Defendant's Exhibit(s) A-B.

On May 11, 2022, this Court held a hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, with Defendant's motion being granted. Plaintiff was made aware on multiple occasions of the pendency of this hearing, but failed to show up to represent himself.

Defendant's Motion meets the standards required when challenging a claim under the doctrine of res judicata. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss at 1-4.

Upon review of the Complaint, Defendant's Motion, Plaintiff's Reply, and the arguments presented, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby DISMISSED.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers at Miami-Dade County, Florida on this 17th day of May, 2022.

2021-025117-CA-01 05-17-2022 8:52 AM

Hon. William Thomas

CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE

Electronically Signed

Final Order as to All Parties SRS #: 12 (Other)

THE COURT DISMISSES THIS CASE AGAINST ANY PARTY NOT LISTED IN THIS FINAL ORDER OR PREVIOUS ORDER(S). THIS CASE IS CLOSED AS TO ALL PARTIES.

Electronically Served:

Ravi Nicholas Sharma, Ravi.sharma@myfloridalegal.com

Ravi Nicholas Sharma, correctionslitigation.eservice@myfloridalegal.com

Ravi Nicholas Sharma, maria.bustle@myfloridalegal.com

Physically Served:

Bruce L. Small DC# 082691, Wakulla CI 110 Melaleuca Drive, Crawfordville, Florida 32327

FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LOGUE and HENDON, JJ., concur.