Court Opinion

ID: 9838470
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-06 15:06:27.940512+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:31.612726
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                              State of Florida

                     Opinion filed September 6, 2023.
      Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                           ________________

                            No. 3D23-1516
                     Lower Tribunal No. F12-19634
                         ________________

                         Alphonso G. Lucas,
                                Petitioner,

                                    vs.

                        The State of Florida,
                               Respondent.

    A Case of Original Jurisdiction – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.

    Alphonso G. Lucas, in proper person.

    Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for respondent.

Before EMAS, HENDON and BOKOR, JJ.

    EMAS, J.
      In 3D23-845, Alphonso G. Lucas filed a petition for writ of habeas

corpus, alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. We denied that

petition, see Lucas v. State, 365 So. 3d 1181 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023), and

thereafter denied Lucas’ motion for rehearing. The mandate issued on July

17, 2023.

      On August 2, 2023, Petitioner filed the instant petition for habeas

corpus, again alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.        The

petition is identical in all relevant respects. No new claims are raised; no

new arguments advanced. Petitioner does allude to the prior petition filed in

3D23-845, and its denial by this court, adding that the State and this court

“have continued to overlook the unconstitutional issue that the Petitioner is

raising.” Petitioner further maintains he has filed this “new” petition “because

his argument does contain merit and he is aware of the Court’s attempt to

procedurally bar further proceedings in this Court.”

      We dismiss the petition as successive, see Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(d)(6)(C) (appellate rule governing petitions alleging ineffective

assistance of appellate counsel, and providing: “The court may dismiss a

second or successive petition if it does not allege new grounds and the prior

determination was on the merits, or if a failure to assert the grounds was an

abuse of procedure”), and place Petitioner on notice that meritless and

                                       2
successive filings such as these may be deemed frivolous and an abuse of

the postconviction process, and may subject Petitioner to sanctions,

including an order directing the clerk of this court not to accept any future

filings from Petitioner concerning circuit court case number F12-19634

unless such filings are signed by a member in good standing of The Florida

Bar. See also § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2023) (providing: “A prisoner who is

found by a court to have brought a frivolous or malicious . . . collateral

criminal proceeding . . . is subject to disciplinary procedures pursuant to the

rules of the Department of Corrections”); Pawley v. State, 217 So. 3d 128

(Fla. 3d DCA 2017); Simmons v. State, 61 So. 3d 1175 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).

      Petition dismissed.

                                      3