Case Title: Antonio Johnson v. Katherine Fernandez Rundle, Etc.

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC10-35

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2011-01-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC10-35 
____________ 
 
ANTONIO JOHNSON,  
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
KATHERINE FERNANDEZ RUNDLE, etc.,  
Respondent. 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC10-207 
____________ 
 
ANTONIO JOHNSON, 
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
EDWIN G. BUSS, etc.,  
Respondent. 
 
[January 6, 2011] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
Antonio Johnson, an inmate in state custody, filed two pro se petitions 
seeking extraordinary relief from the Court, both challenging the lawfulness of 
Johnson’s 1998 conviction for armed robbery and resulting life sentence entered by 
 
- 2 - 
the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, in and for Miami-Dade County, 
Florida, in Case No. F97-32329.1  The cases were consolidated and the petitions 
denied on April 22, 2010.  Johnson v. Rundle, 36 So. 3d 84 (Fla. 2010) (table).  
The Court retained jurisdiction for purposes of sanctioning based upon Johnson’s 
repeated filing of frivolous actions attacking his judgment in case number F97-
32329.  Accordingly, the Court directed Johnson to show cause why he should not 
be barred from filing further pleadings or other papers pertaining to his 1998 
judgment, unless such filings are signed by a member of The Florida Bar in good 
standing.  We now sanction Johnson. 
For several years, Johnson has unsuccessfully sought relief from this Court.  
Undaunted, Johnson filed a petition for writ of quo warranto (Case No. SC10-35) 
on January 1, 2010, and a petition for writ of habeas corpus (Case No. SC10-207) 
on February 2, 2010.  Specifically, since 2004, Johnson has initiated a total of 
sixteen proceedings in this Court seeking extraordinary relief pertaining to his 
conviction and sentence entered by the Eleventh Circuit in Case No. F97-32329.   
See Johnson v. Rundle, No. SC09-2150 (Fla. Feb. 10, 2010) (petition for quo 
warranto transferred to circuit court) (unpublished); Johnson v. McNeil, 17 So. 3d 
292 (Fla. 2009) (habeas corpus petition dismissed) (table); Johnson v. State, 13 So. 
3d 1056 (Fla. 2009) (mandamus petition dismissed) (table); Johnson v. McNeil, 
                                          
 
1.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(8), Fla. Const.; art. V, § 3(b)(9), 
Fla. Const. 
 
- 3 - 
No. SC09-53 (Fla. Mar. 12, 2009) (petition for writ of quo warranto transferred to 
circuit court) (unpublished); Johnson v. State, No. SC08-1156 (Fla. July 24, 2008) 
(petition for writ of habeas corpus transferred to circuit court for consideration as 
rule 3.850 or 3.800(a) motion) (unpublished); Johnson v. State, 985 So. 2d 1091 
(Fla. 2008) (all writs petition dismissed) (table); Johnson v. McDonough, No. 
SC07-2228 (Fla. Jan. 23, 2008) (petition for writ of mandamus transferred) 
(unpublished); Johnson v. Florida Dept. of Corrections, No. SC07-2269 (Fla. Dec. 
26, 2007) (transfer of petition for writ of mandamus for consideration in pending 
case) (unpublished); Johnson v. McDonough, 969 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 2007) (habeas 
corpus petition dismissed) (table); Johnson v. McDonough, 966 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 
2007) (mandamus petition dismissed) (table); Johnson v. State, 962 So. 2d 337 
(Fla. 2007) (petition for writ of quo warranto denied) (table); Johnson v. Bateman, 
No. SC07-1018 (Fla. Jun. 26, 2007) (petition for writ of quo warranto treated as 
notice of appeal and transferred to the First District Court of Appeal) 
(unpublished); Johnson v. State, 939 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 2006) (all writs petition 
denied) (table); Johnson v. State, 881 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 2004) (petition for writ of 
habeas corpus dismissed) (table). 
This Court has the “inherent judicial authority to sanction an abusive 
litigant.”  Sibley v. Fla. Judicial Qualifications Comm’n, 973 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 
2006).  In response to the Court’s order, rather than show cause why he should not 
 
- 4 - 
be sanctioned for his abusive filings, Johnson continues to assert that his filings 
were not abusive, were meritorious, and that this Court is the proper forum for him 
to continually seek redress of the many injustices he claims have been thrust upon 
him.  Johnson also asks that the Court review his “meritorious pleadings” 
appended to the response, and that the petition for writ of habeas corpus in Case 
No. SC10-207 be reconsidered by the Court as one seeking mandamus.  Thus, 
Johnson’s response to the show cause order highlights the necessity of the sanction 
we now impose. 
Johnson also claims that this Court has never considered the difficulties a 
barring order might impose on a pro se litigant.  To the contrary, this Court has 
long maintained that such orders “should not be construed as a diminution of our 
support for the principle of free access to the courts.”  Attwood v. Singletary, 661 
So. 2d 1216, 1217 (Fla. 1995).  Sanctioning abusive litigants by prohibiting pro se 
pleadings and requiring all prospective filings with the Court be signed by a 
member of The Florida Bar in good standing furthers the right of access.  The 
sanction does so by providing the Court the opportunity to devote “finite resources 
to the consideration of legitimate claims of persons who have not abused the 
process.”  Id.; see also Pettway v. McNeil, 987 So. 2d 20, 22 (Fla. 2008) (“One 
justification for such a sanction lies in the protection of the rights of others to have 
the Court conduct timely reviews of their legitimate filings.”). 
 
- 5 - 
 
As we have concluded in similar cases, under the facts of this case, “[t]here 
is a strong inference that unless he is stopped, [Johnson] will continue filing 
nonmeritorious requests for relief in this Court,” Pettway, 987 So. 2d at 22, 
regarding his conviction and sentence in State v. Johnson, Case No. F97-32329.  
See Lanier v. State, 982 So. 2d 626, 627-28 (Fla. 2008); Tate v. McNeil, 983 So. 
2d 502, 504 (Fla. 2008); Jackson v. Florida Dept. of Corrections, 790 So. 2d 398, 
401-2 (Fla. 2001).  Accordingly, we hereby direct the Clerk of this Court to accept 
no further pleadings or other requests for relief relating to case number 97-32329 
from Johnson for filing unless submitted and signed by a lawyer in good standing 
as a member of The Florida Bar.   
 
Furthermore, since we have in this opinion found that Johnson has 
repeatedly initiated frivolous proceedings, we direct the Clerk of this Court, 
pursuant to section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes (2010), to forward a certified copy 
of this opinion to the Department of Corrections institution where Johnson is 
incarcerated. 
 
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
 
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND 
IF FILED, DETERMINED. 
 
 
 
- 6 - 
Two Cases: 
 
Original Proceeding – Quo Warranto  
and an Original Proceeding – Habeas Corpus  
 
Antonio Johnson, Lake City, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
Honorable Katherine Fernandez Rundle, State Attorney, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, 
Miami, Florida, and Honorable Edwin G. Buss, The Department of Corrections, 
Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
 
for Respondents