Opinion ID: 2517913
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Issue 2: The district court exceeded its power to limit the filing of future motions.

Text: After dismissing Holt's fourth 1507 motion, the district court ruled that Holt was barred from filing, and the clerk of the court was barred from accepting, such future motions in his criminal case: It is now to the point that these successive and frivolous motions for post judgment relief are taking valuable judicial resources, are cumulative, spurious and serve no purpose but to occupy the time of this prisoner. Thus, the court orders that this prisoner is barred from filing any further K.S.A. 60-1507 or similar motions surrounding this case. The clerk of the court is directed to refrain from filing further motions from this prisoner in regard to the convictions in Geary County case number 93 CR 430. All due process to which this prisoner is entitled has been exhausted and there must come a time for the judicial system to be free from these types of successive motions. (Emphasis added.) Holt argues that the district court (1) exceeded its authority and violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights under the United States Constitution by barring prospective motions, and (2) lacked jurisdiction to order the clerk of the court not to file prospective motions. The State responds that the district court's order was a proper exercise of the court's inherent power to control the litigation.