Summary
dismissing the petition and ordering petitioner to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed and why the petition should not be deemed frivolous
Summary of this case from Lockhart v. CrewsOpinion
CASE NO.: SC13-513 Lower Tribunal No.: 01-CF-019518
06-27-2013
JEROME K. LOCKHART A/K/A Petitioner(s) v. MICHAEL D. CREWS, ETC. GREGORY TYRONE HARRIS Respondent(s)
Because the Court has determined that relief is not authorized, this case is hereby dismissed. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004). Any motions or other requests for relief are also denied.
The Court hereby expressly retains jurisdiction to pursue any possible sanctions against petitioner. See generally Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a).
Since 2004, petitioner has initiated twenty-six other cases in this Court. See Lockhart v. State, Case No. SC12-1233 (Fla. March 13, 2013) (table decision) (all writs petition dismissed); Lockhart v. Crews, Case No. SC12-2285 (Fla. Jan. 25, 2013) (table decision) (habeas corpus petition dismissed); Lockhart v. Crews, 108 So. 3d 655 (Fla. 2013) (table decision) (habeas corpus petition dismissed); Lockhart v. State, 104 So. 3d 1085 (Fla. 2012) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Lockhart v. State, 103 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 2012) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Lockhart v. State, 69 So. 3d 278 (Fla. 2011) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Lockhart v. Tucker, 72 So. 3d 746 (Fla. 2011) (table decision) (habeas corpus petition dismissed); Lockhart v. State, 49 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 2010) (table decision) (mandamus petition denied); Lockhart v. State, 55 So. 3d 1287 (Fla. 2010) (table decision) (mandamus petition dismissed); Harris v. State, 47 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 2010) (table decision) (mandamus petition denied); Lockhart v. State, 49 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 2010) (table decision) (mandamus petition denied); Lockhart v. State, 44 So. 3d 581 (Fla. 2010) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Lockhart v. State, 43 So. 3d 690 (Fla. 2010) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Harris v. McNeil, 5 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 2009) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Lockhart v. McNeil, 4 So. 3d 1220 (Fla. 2009) (table decision) (mandamus petition denied); Lockhart v. State, Case No. SC08-839 (Fla. May 6, 2008) (mandamus petition dismissed); Harris v. State, 991 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 2008) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Harris v. McDonough, 941 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 2006) (table decision) (habeas corpus petition dismissed); Harris v. Crist, 939 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 2006) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Harris v. Crist, Case No. SC06-540 (Fla. July 12, 2006) (quo warranto petition transferred to the district court); Harris v. State, 935 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 2006) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Harris v. Crist, 930 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 2006) (table decision) (quo warranto petition dismissed); Harris v. State, 924 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 2006) (table decision) (mandamus petition denied); Harris v. State, 917 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 2005) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Harris v. State, 915 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 2005) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed); Harris v. State, 871 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2004) (table decision) (petition for review dismissed).
This Court has chosen to sanction pro se petitioners who have abused the judicial process and otherwise misused this Court's limited judicial resources by filing frivolous, non-meritorious, or otherwise inappropriate filings related to their convictions and sentences. Such petitioners have been barred from initiating further proceedings in this Court related to their convictions and sentences unless their pleadings, motions, or other requests for relief were filed under the signature of a member of The Florida Bar in good standing. See, e.g., Steele v. State, 14 So. 3d 221 (Fla. 2009); Pettway v. McNeil, 987 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2008); Tate v. McNeil, 983 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 2008); Rivera v. State, 728 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 1998).
It appearing that petitioner has abused the judicial process by filing numerous pro se filings in this Court that are either meritless or not appropriate for this Court's review, the Court now takes action. Therefore, Jerome K. Lockhart A/K/A Gregory Tyrone Harris is hereby directed to show cause on or before July 17, 2013, why he should not be barred from filing any pleadings, motions, or other requests for relief in this Court related to Case No. 01-CF-019518 unless such filings are signed by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing. The petitioner is also directed to show cause why, pursuant to section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes, a certified copy of the Court's findings should not be forwarded to the appropriate institution for disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Florida Department of Corrections as provided in section 944.09, Florida Statutes. PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. A True Copy
Test:
______________________
Thomas D. Hall
Clerk, Supreme Court
kb
Served:
CHRISTINA ZUCCARO
JEROME KENNETH LOCKHART
JENNIFER ALANI PARKER
HON. PAMELA JO BONDI
HON. BOB INZER, CLERK