LAW.coLAW.co

WILLIAMS v. STATE (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.2021-11-03No. No. 1D21-2542

Summary

Holding. The trial court's order dismissing the postconviction relief motion was affirmed, and the appeal itself was determined to be frivolous.

Maurice Williams appealed the trial court's decision to dismiss his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Williams claimed his convictions violated double jeopardy protections and that the trial court failed to orally announce the basis for reclassifying his aggravated battery conviction. The trial court rejected both arguments as improper subjects for a 3.800(a) motion, and the appellate court agreed that no error occurred.

The court noted this was Williams's fifth collateral attack on his 2013 conviction in the same case, following four previous unsuccessful appeals raising postconviction relief issues. Because the court found the appeal to be frivolous, it issued a warning that future frivolous filings could result in sanctions, including restrictions on Williams's ability to file additional pro se appeals and referral to the Florida Department of Corrections for disciplinary action.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

  • Whether a Rule 3.800(a) motion is the proper vehicle to raise double jeopardy claims
  • Whether failure to orally announce the basis for conviction reclassification is cognizable in a 3.800(a) motion
  • Consequences of repeated frivolous collateral attacks on the same conviction

Procedural posture

Williams appealed an order summarily dismissing his postconviction relief motion filed in the trial court.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

Maurice Williams appeals an order summarily dismissing his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Williams asserted that his convictions violated double jeopardy and that the basis for reclassification of his aggravated battery conviction was not orally announced. The trial court determined that his claims were not cognizable in a 3.800(a) motion. Finding no error by the trial court, we affirm.

We also conclude that this appeal is frivolous. This appeal marks Williams fifth collateral attack on his 2013 judgment and sentence in Leon County Circuit Court Case Number 2012-CF-896. He appealed from orders denying postconviction relief in cases 1D14-5122, 1D17-0669, 1D18-0162, and 1D19-1729. Williams received no relief in any of these cases.

The Court warns Williams that any future filings that this Court determines to be frivolous may result in the imposition of sanctions, including a prohibition against any further pro se filings in this Court and a referral to the appropriate institution or facility of the Florida Department of Corrections for disciplinary procedures. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2021) (providing that “[a] prisoner who is found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious suit, action, claim, proceeding, or appeal ․ or to have brought a frivolous or malicious collateral criminal proceeding ․ is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department of Corrections”).

Affirmed.

Per Curiam.

Ray, Osterhaus, and Nordby, JJ., concur.