From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glasco v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Nov 18, 2005
914 So. 2d 512 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Summary

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Cothron v. State

Opinion

No. 5D05-1839.

November 18, 2005.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Hernando County, Jack Springstead, J.

Willie H. Glasco, Jr., Cross City, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.


Willie H. Glasco, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his latest rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. He repeats the arguments presented in previous motions that he was placed in double jeopardy when he was found guilty of multiple sexual battery crimes when he should have been convicted of only one crime committed during a single episode. He also complains that his score sheet erroneously reflected excess victim injury points. Contrary to his response to this court's show cause order under State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla. 1999), both the trial court and this court have considered and denied his claims on the merits on more than one occasion, although in slightly different permutations. See Glasco v. State, 642 So.2d 1379 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Glasco v. State, 656 So.2d 523 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Glasco v. State, 892 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).

We view this petition as frivolous and an abuse of process. See Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409, 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (opining "Enough is enough."); Henderson v. State, 903 So.2d 999 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (recognizing frivolous criminal appeals clog the courts and, worse, hurt meritorious criminal appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with the entire class of criminal defendants).

Accordingly, we prohibit Willie H. Glasco, Jr., from filing with this Court any further pro se pleadings concerning the convictions and sentences he received in the Hernando County Fifth Judicial Circuit Court Case No. 90-504-CF. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se documents concerning this case from Glasco. Any further filings regarding this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk of this Court, unless they are filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. The Clerk of this Court is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution as provided in section 944.09, Florida Statutes. See Simpkins v. State, 909 So.2d 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).

AFFIRMED; Future Pro Se Filings PROHIBITED.

PETERSON, GRIFFIN and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Glasco v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Nov 18, 2005
914 So. 2d 512 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Cothron v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Longley v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Reyes v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Harris v. State

recognizing that frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Daniels v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Edwards v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from McKeehan v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Williams v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Snead v. State

recognizing frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Weidmann v. State

recognizing that frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience

Summary of this case from Britt v. State

explaining that frivolous collateral appeals clog the courts and hurt meritorious appeals by inviting sweeping rulings and by engendering judicial impatience with all defendants

Summary of this case from Wallace v. State
Case details for

Glasco v. State

Case Details

Full title:Willie H. GLASCO, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Nov 18, 2005

Citations

914 So. 2d 512 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Citing Cases

Williams v. State

We now deny Williams' mandamus petition on the merits and hold that he is barred from further pro se filings…

Weidmann v. State

We conclude that the present motion is frivolous and an abuse of process. See Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409,…