Summary
In Brown v. State, 186 So.3d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016), this court denied Mr. Brown's petition for writ of prohibition on the merits and warned him that future frivolous or successive filings in the court "may result in the imposition of sanctions against him," including additional limitations on his ability to file pro se appeals and petitions in this court.
Summary of this case from Brown v. JonesOpinion
No. 1D16–0471.
03-04-2016
Nathaniel J. BROWN, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Nathaniel J. Brown, pro se, Petitioner. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Nathaniel J. Brown, pro se, Petitioner.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
The petition for writ of prohibition is denied on the merits.
Petitioner is warned that any future pleadings determined by this court to be frivolous or successive may result in the imposition of sanctions against him, including a prohibition against any further pro se pleadings and a referral to the Florida Department of Corrections for disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department as provided in section 944.279, Florida Statutes (2015). See Fla. R. App. P. 9.410.
ROBERTS, C. J., MAKAR and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.