Case Title: Stewart v. Dixon

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC22-818

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2022-12-01T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC22-818 
____________ 
 
ARSENIO STEWART, 
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
RICKY D. DIXON, etc., 
Respondent. 
 
December 1, 2022 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
 
This case is before the Court on the petition of Arsenio Stewart 
for a writ of habeas corpus.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 
3(b)(9), Fla. Const.  By order dated August 10, 2022, we dismissed 
Stewart’s petition as unauthorized pursuant to Baker v. State, 878 
So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).  Stewart v. Dixon, No. SC22-818, 2022 WL 
3221246 (Fla. Aug. 10, 2022).  Concurrent with the dismissal of the 
petition, we expressly retained jurisdiction to pursue possible 
sanctions against Stewart.  Id.; see Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a) 
(Sanctions; Court’s Motion). 
 
- 2 - 
 
Stewart was convicted in the Seventh Judicial Circuit (Putnam 
County) on one count of felony battery (case number 
542007CF002014CFAXMX).  He was sentenced to four years’ 
imprisonment in 2009. 
 
Since 2016, Stewart has filed four petitions related to his 
conviction and sentence in the above-noted circuit court case.  We 
have never granted the relief sought in any of Stewart’s filings, 
which have all been dismissed or transferred by the Court.  All of 
these pleadings have raised the exact same claim for relief found in 
the instant habeas petition, in which Stewart argued that his 
conviction was the result of trial court error.  We dismissed the 
petition as unauthorized and directed Stewart to show cause why 
he should not be barred from filing any further requests for relief 
and referred to the Department of Corrections for possible 
disciplinary action pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes 
(2022). 
 
Stewart filed a response to the Court’s order in which he 
argues that he should not be barred from seeking relief in this 
Court.  Stewart repeats the same argument that was presented in 
 
- 3 - 
his habeas petition and argues that the Court should grant him the 
relief he seeks. 
 
Upon consideration of Stewart’s response, we find that his 
arguments are without merit and that he has failed to show cause 
why sanctions should not be imposed.  Therefore, based on 
Stewart’s history of filing pro se petitions and requests for relief that 
were meritless or otherwise inappropriate for this Court’s review, we 
find that he has abused the Court’s limited judicial resources.  See 
Pettway v. McNeil, 987 So. 2d 20, 22 (Fla. 2008) (explaining that 
this Court has previously “exercised the inherent judicial authority 
to sanction an abusive litigant” and that “[o]ne 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”).  If no 
action is taken, Stewart will continue to burden the Court’s 
resources.  We further conclude that Stewart’s habeas petition filed 
in this case is a frivolous proceeding brought before the Court by a 
state prisoner.  See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2022). 
 
Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any 
future pleadings or other requests for relief submitted by Arsenio 
Stewart that are related to case number 542007CF002014CFAXMX, 
 
- 4 - 
unless such filings are signed by a member in good standing of The 
Florida Bar.  Furthermore, because we have found Stewart’s 
petition to be frivolous, we direct the Clerk of this Court, pursuant 
to section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes (2022), to forward a copy of 
this opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections’ institution or 
facility in which Stewart is incarcerated. 
 
No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by 
this Court. 
 
It is so ordered. 
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, POLSTON, LABARGA, COURIEL, 
GROSSHANS, and FRANCIS, JJ., concur. 
 
Original Proceeding – Habeas Corpus 
 
Arsenio Stewart, pro se, Raiford, Florida, 
 
for Petitioner 
 
No appearance for Respondent