Title: Rivera v. Dixon
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC21-1190
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: March 24, 2022

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC21-1190 
____________ 
 
SAMUEL RIVERA, 
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
RICKY D. DIXON, etc., 
Respondent. 
 
March 24, 2022 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
Samuel Rivera, an inmate in state custody, filed a pro se 
petition with this Court seeking a declaratory judgment, which we 
treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus.1  On December 13, 
2021, we dismissed the instant petition and expressly retained 
jurisdiction to pursue possible sanctions against Rivera.  Rivera v. 
Dixon, No. SC21-1190, 2021 WL 5875469 (Fla. Dec. 13, 2021); see 
Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a) (Sanctions; Court’s Motion).  We now find 
 
 
1.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 3(b)(9), Fla. Const. 
 
- 2 - 
that Rivera has failed to show cause why he should not be barred, 
and we sanction him as set forth below. 
Rivera was convicted in Eleventh Judicial Circuit (Miami-Dade 
County) case number 131985CF0250370001XX of one count of 
first-degree murder and one count of robbery with a gun or deadly 
weapon, for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment and 134 
years’ imprisonment, respectively.  On direct appeal, his sentence of 
134 years for robbery was reversed and remanded, and he was 
resentenced to 22 years’ imprisonment.  See Rivera v. State, 526 So. 
2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).  Since 2009, Rivera has demonstrated 
a pattern of vexatious filing of meritless pro se requests for relief in 
this Court related to case number 131985CF0250370001XX. 
Including the petition in the instant case, Rivera has filed 
sixteen pro se petitions with this Court.2  The Court has never 
granted Rivera the relief sought in any of his filings here; all of the 
petitions were dismissed or denied.  His petition in this case is no 
exception.  Rivera argued that his convictions violate double 
 
 
2.  See Rivera v. Dixon, No. SC21-1190, 2021 WL 5875469 
(Fla. Dec. 13, 2021). 
 
- 3 - 
jeopardy because the trial court dismissed the indictment for count 
III, which he asserts is the same as counts I and II, of which he was 
convicted.  On December 13, 2021, we dismissed the instant 
petition as unauthorized pursuant to Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 
1236 (Fla. 2004). 
In response to this Court’s show cause order, Rivera maintains 
that his convictions are a violation of double jeopardy.  Rivera 
asserts that before this Court takes any action sanctioning him, the 
Court should first look at all the facts and circumstances of his 
convictions and sentence.  He then argues the merits of what he 
believes were errors that occurred during his arrest, indictment, 
and jury trial. 
Upon consideration of Rivera’s response, we find that he has 
failed to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed.  
Therefore, based on Rivera’s extensive history of filing pro se 
petitions and requests for relief that were meritless or otherwise 
inappropriate for this Court’s review, we now 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 
 
- 4 - 
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, Rivera will continue to burden the Court’s resources.  We 
further conclude that Rivera’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. (2021). 
 
Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any 
future pleadings or other requests for relief submitted by Samuel 
Rivera that are related to case number 131985CF0250370001XX, 
unless such filings are signed by a member in good standing of The 
Florida Bar.  Furthermore, because we have found Rivera’s petition 
to be frivolous, we direct the Clerk of this Court, pursuant to 
section 944.279(1), Florida Statutes (2021), to forward a copy of this 
opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections’ institution or 
facility in which Rivera is incarcerated. 
No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by 
this Court. 
It is so ordered. 
 
- 5 - 
CANADY, C.J., and POLSTON, LABARGA, LAWSON, MUÑIZ, 
COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur. 
 
Original Proceeding – Habeas Corpus 
 
Samuel Rivera, pro se, Florida City, Florida, 
 
for Petitioner 
 
No appearance for Respondent