William Friss v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2007 WILLIAM C. FRISS, Appellant, v. CASE NO. 5D07-1391 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed October 26, 2007 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County, Brian D. Lambert, Judge. William C. Friss, Lowell, p ro se. No Appearance for Appellee. PER CURIAM. William C. Friss has initiated multiple, successive postconviction proceedings attacking his convictions and sentences on charges of attempted first-degree murder, solicitation to commit kidnapping, and solicitation to violate a domestic violence injunction, from Marion County case number 00-892-CF. In his last rule 3.850 motion, Friss once again raised claims which the trial court denied as successive and timebarred. We affirmed. Friss v. State, 940 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 5 th DCA 2006). In his newest rule 3.850 motion, Friss raises the same claims again. denied the motion. We once again affirm. The trial court once again Additionally, we ordered Friss to show cause why he should not be denied access to this court to further attack his Marion County convictions and sentences. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999). We have carefully reviewed Friss' response to our order, and find no merit thereto. At this point, Friss is abusing the judicial process by his successive attacks upon these convictions and sentences. Accordingly, in order to preserve judicial resources, William C. Friss is prohibited from filing any further pro se pleadings, motions or petitions in this court relating to Marion County case number 00-892-CF. The Clerk of the Fifth District Court of Appeal is directed not to accept any further pleadings in the above-styled case that have not been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a duly licensed member of the Florida Bar. The Clerk is further directed to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate institution for consideration of disciplinary procedures. See ยง 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2005); Simpkins v. State, 909 So. 2d 427, 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). AFFIRMED; future pro se filings PROHIBITED; certified opinion FORWARDED to Department of Corrections. GRIFFIN, TORPY and LAWSON, JJ., concur. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
