Opinion
No. SC07-761.
September 19, 2007.
Lower Tribunal Nos. 5D07-150, 02-CC-10348, 03-CA-10528-0.
To the extent Petitioner seeks review of the final decision of the Fifth District Court of Appeal regarding Case No. 5D07-150, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. A writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct the manner in which a court shall act in the lawful exercise of its jurisdiction. State ex rel. North St. Lucie River Drainage Dist. v. Kanner, 11 So. 2d 889, 890 (Fla. 1943); see also Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (stating that mandamus "is not an appropriate vehicle for review of a merely erroneous decision nor is it proper to mandate the doing (or undoing) of a discretionary act"), approved, 431 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1983).
To the extent Petitioner seeks to relitigate his respective claims against the courts in the Ninth Judicial Circuit, in and for Orange County, Florida, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied as successive. See Jenkins v. Wainwright, 322 So. 2d 477, 478 (Fla. 1975) (stating that "once a petitioner seeks relief in a particular court by means of a petition for extraordinary writ . . . he has picked his forum [and] is not entitled to a second or third opportunity for the same relief by the same writ in a different court").
WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, and CANTERO, JJ., concur.