MOBLEY v. STATE (2022)

ORDER FOLLOWING SHOW-CAUSE PROCEEDING

Attorney John J. Rogers, Florida Bar Number 35970, appeared before this court on Tuesday, March 22, 2022, to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to comply with this court's orders.

Mr. Rogers filed the notice of appeal in the trial court on October 14, 2021, and the notice was transmitted to this court on October 19. Because no filing fee accompanied the notice, on October 19 this court issued its standard fee order. The order required the appellant to submit to this court the $300 filing fee or indigency documentation within twenty days, failing which the appeal would be subject to dismissal and counsel subject to sanctions. Mr. Rogers did not respond.

On October 20, 2021, this court issued an order noting that the notice of appeal was unsigned and that it stated that appellant intended to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress, which is not appealable. The order directed appellant to file a signed amended notice of appeal reciting the date the judgment and sentence were rendered or show cause within fifteen days why the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Rogers did not respond.

On November 30, 2021, this court followed up with an order directing Mr. Rogers to respond to the October 19 fee order within seven days or risk sanctions. Also on November 30, this court followed up with an order directing Mr. Rogers to respond to the October 20 order within ten days or risk sanctions. Mr. Rogers did not respond.

On December 30, 2021, this court issued an order requiring Mr. Rogers to appear at the court's January 19, 2022, oral argument session to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for his failure to respond to the orders just described. The order advised that if Mr. Rogers complied with the orders by 1 p.m. on Thursday, January 13, 2022, he could seek to discharge the order to show cause.

Mr. Rogers failed to appear at oral argument. Our clerk of court called and emailed him; he responded by text message that he was unable to attend because he was sick with Covid-19.

On February 7, 2022, this court issued an order noting Mr. Rogers' failure to appear on January 19 and his untimely notification of his inability to attend because of illness. The order required Mr. Rogers to appear at the court's March 22, 2022, oral argument session and substantiate his claim of illness and show cause why he should not be sanctioned for his failure to respond to the October 19, October 20, and November 30, 2021, orders.

Mr. Rogers appeared at the rescheduled oral argument date and advised the panel that health and other issues had caused him to fall behind in his work. He stated that he was unaware that he was supposed to appear before this court on January 19, 2022, and that his failure to appear was completely his fault. Mr. Rogers stated that there was no excuse for his omissions, that he was humbled and humiliated, and that it would not happen again.

On March 29, 2022, this court issued an order referring Mr. Rogers to the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit Local Professionalism Panel and directing him to meet with the panel's representatives to discuss his professional obligations to meet deadlines and ensure that his personal health issues did not interfere with his obligations to clients and to the courts. The March 29 order noted that Mr. Rogers still had not complied with this court's orders of October 19, October 20, and November 30, 2021, and gave him five days to do so. Mr. Rogers still has not complied with the orders.

Due to Mr. Rogers' repeated and continued failures to comply with this court's directives and the attendant delays, we hereby refer this matter to The Florida Bar for investigation and initiation of such proceedings as may be appropriate.

PER CURIAM.

LUCAS, ATKINSON, and LABRIT, JJ., Concur.