Court Opinion

ID: 9405882
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-29 16:04:56.576911+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:25.486998
License: Public Domain

Supreme Court of Florida
                             ____________

                          No. SC2023-0178
                            ____________

                        ALVIN EUGENE HILL,
                             Petitioner,

                                  vs.

                        STATE OF FLORIDA,
                           Respondent.

                            June 29, 2023

PER CURIAM.

     Alvin Eugene Hill, an inmate in state custody, filed a pro se

petition for writ of prohibition with this Court challenging the trial

court’s rulings. 1 We denied the petition, retained jurisdiction, and

directed Hill to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for his

repeated misuse of our limited resources. Hill v. State, No. SC2023-

0178, 2023 WL 2674607 (Fla. Mar. 29, 2023); see Fla. R. App. P.

9.410(a) (Sanctions; Court’s Motion). Having failed to file a

     1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(7), Fla. Const.
response, we now find that Hill has failed to show cause why he

should not be barred, and we sanction him as set forth below.

     Hill, who was convicted in his most recent case of possession

of a controlled substance, began filing petitions with the Court in

2018. His filings pertained to several different criminal cases out of

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Court (St. Lucie County) (Case Nos.

562021CF003103AXXXXX, 562019CF000083AXXXXX,

562021MM001588AXXXXX, and 562021CF003103AXXXXX), and a

dependency case regarding his children (Case No.

562018DP000267AXXXXX). We have never granted the relief

sought in any of Hill’s filings, which have all been denied,

dismissed, or transferred to another court for consideration; his

petition in this case is no exception. Hill filed the instant

prohibition petition challenging the trial court’s denial of a motion

and seeking to dismiss his case. Because a writ of prohibition may

not be used in such a manner, we denied the petition and directed

Hill to show cause why he should not be barred from filing any

                                  -2-
further pro se requests for relief in this Court. Hill failed to file a

response to the order to show cause. 2

     Therefore, based on Hill’s history of filing pro se petitions and

requests for relief that are meritless or otherwise inappropriate for

this Court’s review, we now find that he has abused this 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”). Hill did not respond to the order to show cause,

      2. A copy of the show cause order was mailed to Hill’s last
known address on March 29, 2023, at the St. Lucie County Jail.
See Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.516(b)(2) (“Service on . . .
parties who are not represented by an attorney and who are
excused from e-mail service . . . must be made by delivering a copy
of the document or by mailing it to the party or attorney at their last
known address . . . .”). However, on April 13, 2023, the order was
returned because Hill was no longer at the facility. Appearing that
Hill was transferred to Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC)
custody, the order was sent to FDOC on April 14, 2023. The order
was again returned, this time because Hill had an “inactive
account.” A review of the FDOC online offender database revealed
that Hill was released from FDOC custody on April 14, 2023. To
date, Hill has not provided the Court an updated mailing address.

                                   -3-
thus failing to offer any justification for his repeated misuse of this

Court’s resources. We are therefore convinced that if not

restrained, Hill will continue to abuse the judicial process and

burden this Court (and thereby harm other litigants) with frivolous

and meritless filings.

     Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to reject any

future pleadings, filings, papers, or other requests for relief

submitted by Alvin Eugene Hill, unless they are signed by a

member in good standing of The Florida Bar. Henceforth, Hill may

only petition the Court through the assistance of counsel whenever

such counsel determines that the proceeding may have merit and

can be filed in good faith.

     It is so ordered.

MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS,
FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur.

Original Proceeding – Prohibition

Alvin Eugene Hill, pro se, Fort Pierce, Florida,

     for Petitioner

No appearance for Respondent

                                  -4-