Opinion
Case No. SC10-1668.
December 7, 2010.
Lower Tribunal No(s). CR97-13255.
Petitioner's motion for the Court to take judicial notice is hereby granted. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is hereby denied because petitioner raises the same issues as in Durie v. State, 42 So. 3d 233 (Fla. 2010) (table), in which the petition was denied. Cf. Topps v. State, 865 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 2004).
The Court hereby expressly retains jurisdiction to pursue any possible sanctions against petitioner. See generally Fla.R.App.P. 9.410 (sanctions).
In each of the proceedings in this Court seeking extraordinary relief pertaining to his conviction or sentence entered by the Ninth Judicial Circuit, in and for Orange County, Florida, in Case No. CR97-13255, Durie has inundated this Court with petitions well in excess of the page-limits prescribed by Fla.R.App.P. 9.100, and numerous supplemental filings, in excessive of a thousand pages in each case, both leading up to, and after, this Court's unfavorable disposition of his claims. See Durie v. State, 886 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 2004) (table) (petition for mandamus denied in part as procedurally barred; to the extent petitioner sought disqualification of the Fifth District Court of Appeal, denied in part as untimely; to the extent petitioner sought constitutional challenge to Florida Statutes, dismissed without prejudice; to the extent petitioner made request for judicial notice, denied); Durie v. State, Case No. SC07-343 (Fla. Mar. 2007) (petition for habeas corpus transferred to the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orange County); Durie v. State, 18 So. 3d 527 (Fla. 2009) (table) (petition for habeas corpus dismissed as repetitive); Durie v. State, 42 So. 3d 233 (Fla. 2010) (table) (petition for writ of habeas corpus dismissed as unauthorized pursuant to Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)). The petition and supplements in the instant proceeding are equally voluminous, and recent filings contain intimations and threats of physical violence directed at judges who have presided over his criminal and postconviction proceedings.
It appearing that Durie has abused the judicial process by filing numerous prose filings in this Court that are either meritless, not appropriate for this Court's review, or threatening, the Court now takes action. Therefore, Jack Frederick Durie, Jr. is hereby directed to show cause on or before December 28, 2010, why he should not be barred from filing any pleadings, motions, or other requests for relief relating to his conviction or sentence in State v. Durie, Case No. CR97-13255, unless such filings are signed by a member of the Florida Bar in good standing.
PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, and POLSTON, JJ., concur. LABARGA, J., concurs; however, would not issue order to show cause.