RICHARDSON V. STATE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 4, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D17-2436 Lower Tribunal No. 75-11762B ________________ William Charles Richardson, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Stephen T. Millan, Judge. William Charles Richardson, in proper person. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee. Before SALTER, EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ. PER CURIAM. ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE On February 21, 2018, the Court affirmed the denial of William Richardson’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. On the same date, the Court ordered Richardson to show cause why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se appeals, petitions, motions, or other pleadings in this Court relating to lower tribunal case F75-11762. Upon consideration of Richardson’s response to the order to show cause and the successive, duplicative, pro se petitions and appeals brought by Richardson, we conclude that good cause has not been shown. Richardson has engaged in the filing of meritless, frivolous, and successive claims, continuing to seek relief from this Court notwithstanding prior adverse determinations on the merits.1 In accordance with State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999), and Concepcion v. State, 944 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), Richardson is prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to his conviction, judgment, and sentence in lower tribunal case F7511762. We direct the Clerk of the Third District Court of Appeal to refuse to accept any such papers relating to the circuit court case number unless they have been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a duly licensed member of The Richardson failed to provide any response that would justify such filings; see the trial court’s orders in the circuit court case entered October 13, 2017, June 24, 2016, September 24, 2015, and April 12, 2013, as well as this Court’s opinions and orders in Case Nos. 3D17-2051, 3D16-2162, 3D16-1825, 3D15-1936, 3D15-530, and 3D13-2045. 1 2 Florida Bar in good standing. See Whipple v. State, 112 So. 3d 540 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Additionally, any such further and unauthorized pro se filings by Richardson may subject him to appropriate sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action, including the forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2017). 3
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.
