BONNER V. STATE

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed December 16, 2015. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D15-1898 Lower Tribunal No. 01-18283 ________________ Bernard Bonner, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee. An appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Stacy D. Glick, Judge, and Leonard E. Glick, Senior Judge. Bernard Bonner, in proper person. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee. Before SUAREZ, C.J., and WELLS and LOGUE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Bernard Bonner (“Bonner”), appeals from the trial court’s orders denying his petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and his Motion for Rehearing thereon. We affirm. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE On March 1, 2001, in case number F01-18283, Bonner was found guilty, after a jury trial, on the charges of: count 1. burglary with a battery or assault; count 3. Battery; and count 4. kidnapping. Bonner was thereafter sentenced to consecutive life sentences on counts 1 and 4, and to 364 days in county jail on count 3. Bonner appealed his conviction and it was affirmed. See Bonner v. State, 868 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). Since that time, Bonner has filed numerous pro se motions challenging his convictions and sentences, all of which were denied. Bonner has also filed 12 appeals in his case, including six since 2011.1 Those appeals include case number 3D14-184, which raised claims virtually identical to the claims raised in this appeal. As a result, we now order Bonner to show good cause within forty-five days from the date of this opinion why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se proceedings in this Court concerning his convictions and sentences in the above-cited case. Bonner’s appeals include case numbers 3D14-2461, 3D14-1131, 3D14-184, 3D13-1047, 3D11-3187, 3D11-2067, 3D09-3428, 3D08-2767, 3D08-1987 and 3D06-1088. 2 1

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.