VICTOR HICKS vs STATE OF FLORIDA

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT VICTOR HICKS, Petitioner, v. Case No. 5D20-2664 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. ________________________________/ Opinion filed April 9, 2021 Petition for Writ of Mandamus, Paetra Terry Brownlee, Respondent Judge. Victor Hicks, Orlando, pro se. No Appearance for Respondent. PER CURIAM. Due to Petitioner’s apparent abuse of the legal process by his repeated pro se filings, this Court issued an order directing Petitioner to show cause why he should not be prohibited from future pro se filings. See State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999). Having carefully considered the response and finding it fails to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, we conclude that he is abusing the judicial process and should be barred from further pro se filings. Therefore, in order to conserve judicial resources, it is ORDERED that Petitioner is prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se pleadings concerning the present case. The Clerk of this Court is directed not to accept any further pro se filings concerning this case. Any future filings regarding this case will be summarily rejected by the Clerk, unless filed by a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. See Isley v. State, 652 So. 2d 409, 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) ("Enough is enough"). PETITIONER PROHIBITED. COHEN, LAMBERT and HARRIS, 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.