Title: Nairn v. State of Florida
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC2023-0907
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: December 14, 2023

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC2023-0907 
____________ 
 
CURTIS NAIRN, 
Petitioner, 
 
vs. 
 
STATE OF FLORIDA, 
Respondent. 
 
December 14, 2023 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
Curtis Nairn, an inmate in state custody, filed a pro se petition 
for writ of prohibition with this Court seeking relief against the trial 
court.  We denied the petition, retained jurisdiction, and directed 
Nairn to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for his 
repeated misuse of our limited resources.  Nairn v. State, No. 
SC2023-0907, 2023 WL 5959745 (Fla. Sept. 13, 2023); see Fla. R. 
App. P. 9.410(a) (Sanctions; Court’s Motion).  We now find that 
Nairn has failed to show cause why he should not be barred, and 
we sanction him as set forth below. 
 
- 2 - 
 
Nairn was convicted of second-degree murder in the 
Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward County, case 
number 062006CF008303A88810.  He was sentenced to life in 
prison, and his conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct 
appeal.  See Nairn v. State, 978 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).   
Since 2007, Nairn has demonstrated a pattern of vexatious 
filing of meritless pro se requests for relief in this Court related to 
his conviction and sentence.  Including the petition in this case, 
Nairn has filed fifteen pro se petitions with this Court.1  The Court 
did not grant Nairn the relief sought in any of those filings; each of 
the petitions was transferred, dismissed, or denied.  His petition in 
this case is no exception.  Nairn sought a writ of prohibition 
directed at the circuit court judge who was presiding over his 
postconviction proceedings.  Because we “will generally not consider 
the repetitive petitions of persons who have abused the judicial 
processes of the lower courts such that they have been barred from 
filing certain actions there,” we dismissed the instant petition under 
 
 
1.  See Nairn v. State, No. SC2023-0907, 2023 WL 5959745 
(Fla. Sept. 13, 2023). 
 
- 3 - 
Pettway v. State, 776 So. 2d 930, 931 (Fla. 2000), and we directed 
Nairn to show cause why he should not be barred from filing any 
further pro se requests for relief in this Court. 
In response, Nairn filed a “Motion to Withhold Sanction in 
Compliance With Court Order,” in which he continued to argue his 
purported entitlement to relief related to his underlying case.  He 
failed to acknowledge or express any remorse for his repeated 
misuse of this Court’s limited resources nor state that he would 
abstain from further frivolous filings in this Court.  Upon 
consideration of Nairn’s response, we find that he has failed to show 
cause why sanctions should not be imposed.  Therefore, based on 
Nairn’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 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”).  It is apparent that if no action is taken, Nairn will 
 
- 4 - 
continue to burden the Court’s resources.  We further conclude that 
Nairn’s prohibition petition filed in this case is a frivolous 
proceeding brought before the Court by a state prisoner.  See 
§ 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2023).   
Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any 
future pleadings or other requests for relief submitted by Curtis 
Nairn that are related to case number 062006CF008303A88810, 
unless such filings are signed by a member in good standing of The 
Florida Bar.  Furthermore, because we have found Nairn’s petition 
to be frivolous, we direct the Clerk of this Court, under section 
944.279(1), Florida Statutes (2023), to forward a copy of this 
opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections’ institution or 
facility in which Nairn is incarcerated.   
No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by 
this Court. 
It is so ordered. 
MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, 
FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur. 
 
Original Proceeding – Prohibition 
 
Curtis Nairn, pro se, Miami, Florida, 
 
 
- 5 - 
for Petitioner 
 
No appearance for Respondent