Case Title: Schofield v. State

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC17-2281

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2018-05-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC17-2281 
____________ 
 
PRESTON LEONARD SCHOFIELD, 
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
STATE OF FLORIDA, 
Respondent. 
 
[May 24, 2018] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
This case is before the Court following dismissal of Preston Leonard 
Schofield’s pro se petition for writ of error coram nobis.  On February 21, 2018, 
we dismissed the petition and expressly retained jurisdiction to exercise our 
inherent judicial authority to pursue sanctions against Schofield for his abuse of 
this Court’s limited resources.  See Pettway v. McNeil, 987 So. 2d 20, 22 (Fla. 
2008); see also Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a) (Sanctions; Court’s Motion).  Because 
Schofield had filed thirty-five other meritless petitions and notices with this Court 
since 2013, we ordered him to show cause why he should not be barred from filing 
further pro se requests for relief in this Court relating to circuit and county court 
 
 
- 2 - 
case numbers 592011DR0022570000XX, 592011MM004051A000XX, 
592013MM010912A000XX, 292014MM000070000AHC, 
522014CF014665XXXXPC, and 592011MM004272A000XX.  See Schofield v. 
State, No. SC17-2281 (Fla. Feb. 21, 2018).  We now find that Schofield has failed 
to show cause why he should not be barred, and we sanction him as set forth 
below. 
 
Schofield has filed with this Court thirty-five other petitions and notices 
challenging various convictions and sentences, as well as various family court 
orders pertaining to child custody and other divorce matters.1  This Court has never 
                                          
 
 
1.  Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2280, 2018 WL 862941 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018) 
(dismissing petition for writ of error coram nobis); Schofield v. State, No. SC17-
2279, 2018 WL 862786 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018) (dismissing petition for writ of error 
coram nobis); Schofield v. Schofield, No. SC17-2278, 2018 WL 859763 (Fla. Feb. 
14, 2018) (dismissing petition for writ of error coram nobis); Schofield v. State, 
No. SC17-2277, 2018 WL 859605 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018) (dismissing petition for 
writ of error coram nobis); Schofield v. Tampa, No. SC17-1971, 2017 WL 
5496025 (Fla. Nov. 16, 2017) (transferring mandamus petition to the district court 
for consideration as a notice of appeal); Schofield v. Schofield, No. SC17-314, 
2017 WL 2210399 (Fla. May 17, 2017) (denying habeas petition); Schofield v. 
Schofield, No. SC16-2283, 2017 WL 393395 (Fla. Jan. 30, 2017) (dismissing 
petition for writ of error coram nobis); Schofield v. State, No. SC16-1875, 2017 
WL 167542 (Fla. Jan. 17, 2017) (dismissing petition for writ of error coram nobis); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC16-1878 (Fla. Jan. 3, 2017) (dismissing petition for writ 
of error coram nobis); Schofield v. State, No. SC16-1877, 2017 WL 24664 (Fla. 
Jan. 3, 2017) (dismissing petition for writ of error coram nobis); Schofield v. 
Schofield, No. SC16-1850, 2017 WL 24663 (Fla. Jan. 3, 2017) (dismissing petition 
for writ of error coram nobis); Schofield v. State, No. SC16-1879, 2016 WL 
7212340 (Fla. Dec. 13, 2016) (transferring petition for writ of error coram nobis to 
circuit court for consideration as postconviction motion); Schofield v. State, No. 
SC16-1876, 2016 WL 7212338 (Fla. Dec. 13, 2016) (transferring petition for writ 
 
 
- 3 - 
granted Schofield the relief sought in any of his filings here.  Each of his thirty-five 
other petitions and notices has been denied, dismissed, or transferred to another 
court for consideration; his petition in this case is no exception. 
                                          
 
of error coram nobis to county court for consideration as postconviction motion); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC16-343 (Fla. Mar. 8, 2016) (transferring prohibition 
petition to district court); Schofield v. State, 171 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2015) (table) 
(dismissing notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction); Schofield v. State, No. 
SC15-695 (Fla. Apr. 16, 2015) (transferring notice of appeal to circuit court); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC15-384 (Fla. Apr. 6, 2015) (transferring habeas petition 
to district court for consideration as notice of appeal); Schofield v. State, No. 
SC15-241 (Fla. Feb. 12, 2015) (transferring notice of appeal to circuit court); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC15-240 (Fla. Feb. 12, 2015) (transferring notice of appeal 
to circuit court); Schofield v. State, 160 So. 3d 898 (Fla. 2015) (table) (dismissing 
mandamus petition) (No. SC14-1979); Schofield v. State, 160 So. 3d 898 (Fla. 
2015) (table) (dismissing mandamus petition) (No. SC14-1978); Schofield v. State, 
No. SC14-2160 (Fla. Nov. 18, 2014) (transferring prohibition petition to circuit 
court); Schofield v. State, 153 So. 3d 909 (Fla. 2014) (table) (dismissing mandamus 
petition); Schofield v. Eslinger, No. SC14-1789 (Fla. Oct. 1, 2014) (transferring 
habeas petition to district court for consideration as notice of appeal); Schofield v. 
State, No. SC14-372 (Fla. Oct. 1, 2014) (transferring prohibition petition to circuit 
court); Schofield v. Gee, No. SC14-945 (Fla. Sept. 30, 2014) (transferring habeas 
petition to district court); Schofield v. State, 151 So. 3d 1228 (Fla. 2014) (table) 
(dismissing notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction) (No. SC14-1327); Schofield 
v. State, 151 So. 3d 1228 (Fla. 2014) (table) (dismissing notice to invoke 
discretionary jurisdiction) (No. SC14-1153); Schofield v. State, 148 So. 3d 772 
(Fla. 2014) (table) (dismissing notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction); 
Schofield v. State, 135 So. 3d 289 (Fla. 2014) (table) (dismissing prohibition 
petition); Schofield v. State, 134 So. 3d 450 (Fla. 2014) (table) (dismissing notice 
to invoke discretionary jurisdiction); Schofield v. Schofield, 123 So. 3d 1147 (Fla. 
2013) (table) (dismissing notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction); Schofield v. 
State, 123 So. 3d 1147 (Fla. 2013) (table) (dismissing notice to invoke 
discretionary jurisdiction); Schofield v. State, No. SC13-712 (Fla. Aug. 26, 2013) 
(transferring prohibition petition to circuit court); Schofield v. State, 116 So. 3d 
1262 (Fla. 2016) (table) (dismissing notice to invoke discretionary jurisdiction). 
 
 
- 4 - 
 
Schofield filed the instant petition for writ of error coram nobis with this 
Court on December 25, 2017.  In it, he challenged a 2015 conviction and sentence 
for assault, and argued that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the 
charge against him.  Because the writ of error coram nobis no longer exists in 
Florida, on February 21, 2018, we dismissed the petition pursuant to Wood v. State, 
750 So. 2d 592, 595 (Fla. 1999).  In so doing, we expressly retained jurisdiction to 
consider the imposition of sanctions, and in accordance with State v. Spencer, 751 
So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999), ordered Schofield to show cause why he should not be 
prohibited from filing further pro se requests for relief with this Court.   
Rather than file a timely response to the Court’s order, Schofield filed a 
petition for writ of prohibition on March 26, 2018, see Schofield v. Schofield, No. 
SC18-475, followed on March 29, 2018, by a motion in the instant case.  In the 
motion, Schofield simply reiterates the arguments that he raised in his most recent 
batch of petitions that he filed with this Court, which were all meritless and 
ultimately dismissed.  See Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2281 (Fla. Feb. 21, 2018); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2280, 2018 WL 862941 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2279, 2018 WL 862786 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018); 
Schofield v. Schofield, No. SC17-2278, 2018 WL 859763 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018); 
Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2277, 2018 WL 859605 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018).  We 
hereby deny Schofield’s motion.  Additionally, on April 12, 2018, the Court issued 
 
 
- 5 - 
an order transferring Schofield’s prohibition petition to the Fifth District Court of 
Appeal for consideration by that court.  Schofield v. Schofield, No. SC18-475, 2018 
WL 1750897 (Fla. Apr. 12, 2018).  Neither of these new filings, however, contain 
any justification for Schofield’s continued abuse of this Court’s limited resources 
by filing numerous meritless pro se petitions and notices. 
 
Therefore, as a result of Schofield’s extensive history of filing meritless pro 
se petitions and notices in this Court, we hereby find that Schofield has abused this 
Court’s limited judicial resources, and has failed to show cause why this Court 
should not impose sanctions for his repeated frivolous filings.  It is clear that if left 
unrestrained, he will continue his pattern of filing meritless petitions in this Court.  
Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any future pleadings or 
other requests for relief regarding circuit and county court case numbers 
592011DR0022570000XX, 592011MM004051A000XX, 
592013MM010912A000XX, 292014MM000070000AHC, 
522014CF014665XXXXPC, and 592011MM004272A000XX, submitted by 
Preston Leonard Schofield unless such filings are signed by a member in good 
standing of The Florida Bar.  Henceforth, Schofield may only petition this Court 
through the assistance of counsel whenever such counsel determines that the 
proceedings have merit and can be filed in good faith.   
 
No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by the Court. 
 
 
- 6 - 
 
It is so ordered. 
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, 
and LAWSON, JJ., concur.  
 
Original Proceeding – Writ of Error Coram Nobis 
Preston Leonard Schofield, pro se, Tampa, Florida, 
for Petitioner 
No appearance for Respondent