2025-1088•Glen Derrick Johnson v. Sharon Muscella
Testo completo
D ISTRICT C OURT OF A PPEAL O F T HE STATE OF F LORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT GLEN DERRICK JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. SHARON MUSCELLA, Respondent. No. 4D2025-1088 [April 1, 2026] Petition for writ of certiorari to the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Tabitha Blackmon Eves, Judge; L.T. Case No. 062024CC000070AXXXWE. Glen Derrick Johnson, Lauderhill, pro se. No appearance for respondent. P ER CURIAM . Defendant seeks review of the trial court’s order barring him from filing further pro se pleadings. Because such an order is reviewable by petition for writ of certiorari, we treat defendant’s appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.040(c) (“If a party seeks an improper remedy, the cause must be treated as if the proper remedy had been sought . . . .”); see also Epps v. State, 941 So. 2d 1206, 1206-07 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (reviewing through certiorari an order precluding a party from filing further pro se pleadings). We deny certiorari. Because an order prohibiting pro se filings restricts a litigant’s access to the courts, it must comply with due process and provide “notice and an opportunity to respond” to show cause why the sanction should not be imposed. State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999). We find that the trial court gave defendant sufficient due process before barring him from making any further pro se filings. See id. As to the other issues raised by defendant, we find them to be without merit. As such, we deny the writ of certiorari. Petition denied.
2 LEVINE , FORST and S HEPHERD, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.
OCR transcription; preserved printed pages are authoritative
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT GLEN DERRICK JOHNSON, Petitioner, Vv. SHARON MUSCELLA, Respondent. No. 4D2025-1088 [April 1, 2026] Petition for writ of certiorari to the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Tabitha Blackmon Eves, Judge; L.T. Case No. 062024CCOOOO70AXXXWE. Glen Derrick Johnson, Lauderhill, pro se. No appearance for respondent. PER CURIAM. Defendant seeks review of the trial court’s order barring him from filing further pro se pleadings. Because such an order is reviewable by petition for writ of certiorari, we treat defendant’s appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.040(c) (“If a party seeks an improper remedy, the cause must be treated as if the proper remedy had been sought... .”); see also Epps v. State, 941 So. 2d 1206, 1206-07 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (reviewing through certiorari an order precluding a party from filing further pro se pleadings). We deny certiorari. Because an order prohibiting pro se filings restricts a litigant’s access to the courts, it must comply with due process and provide “notice and an opportunity to respond” to show cause why the sanction should not be imposed. State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999). We find that the trial court gave defendant sufficient due process before barring him from making any further pro se filings. See id. As to the other issues raised by defendant, we find them to be without merit. As such, we deny the writ of certiorari. Petition denied. LEVINE, FORST and SHEPHERD, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.
Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude
Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.