MCGLOCKLIN V. STATE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 17, 2019. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D16-2466 Lower Tribunal No. 00-19296 ________________ Mike McGlocklin, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Milton Hirsch, Judge. Mike McGlocklin, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Marlon J. Weiss, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before EMAS, C.J., and SALTER and LOGUE, JJ. PER CURIAM. ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE On October 3, 2018, the Court affirmed the denial of Mike McGlocklin’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. On the same date, the Court ordered McGlocklin 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 F00-19296. Upon consideration of McGlocklin’s response to the order to show cause and the successive, duplicative, pro se petitions and appeals brought by McGlocklin, we conclude that good cause has not been shown. McGlocklin 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. In accordance with State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999), and Concepcion v. State, 944 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), McGlocklin is prohibited from filing any further pro se appeals, pleadings, motions, or petitions relating to his conviction, judgment, and sentence in lower tribunal case F0019296. 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 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 McGlocklin 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. (2018). 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.
