Legal Document

507 U.S. 290 113 S.Ct. 1231 122 L.Ed.2d 636 John Robert DEMOS, Jr.v.Michael C. STORRIE et al. No. 92-6846. March 8, 1993. PER CURIAM. 1 Pro se petitioner R. Demos, Jr. has made 48 in forma pauperis filings this Court since the beginning of October 1988 Term, many which challenged sanctions imposed by lower courts for frivolous filings. Almost two years ago, we prospectively denied Demos leave to proceed "in all future petitions extraordinary relief." In re 500 ----, 111 1569, 1570, 114 20 (1991) (per curiam ). At that time, said "remains free under present order file requests relief other than an writ, if he qualifies Court's Rule 39 and does not similarly abuse privilege." Ibid. 2 Since then, filed 14 certiorari. We first seven outright, our 39.8 as following six. Today, invoke again with respect instant petition. is allowed until 29, 1993, within pay docketing fees required 38 submit petition compliance 33. Because refused heed prior warning, further direct Clerk reject certiorari from noncriminal matters unless pays fee submits his See Martin v. District Columbia Appeals, 506 397, 121 305 (1992) Demos' continued course abusive plainly warrants sanction. 3 It so ordered. 4 Justice STEVENS, whom BLACKMUN joins, dissenting. 5 my opinion, administration special procedures disposing repetitive less efficient past practice simply denying such petitions.* I continue adhere previously stated views on issue, see 398, (Stevens, J., dissenting); Zatko California, 502 112 355, 357, 116 293 dissenting), would deny rather invoking case. Accordingly, respectfully dissent. * The next issue will confront developing its jurisprudence, instance, whether apply orders like today's retroactively, pending date they are issued.

Classification Label: 1