Kenneth L. Grimsley v. Julie L. Jones, etc.
213 So. 3d 353
| Fla. | 2016Background
- Kenneth L. Grimsley is a state prisoner serving sentences from Marion County convictions (robbery with a firearm, aggravated battery with a firearm, possession of a firearm by a felon) and multiple probation-violation sentences; he did not appeal his 1997 sentences.
- Since 2005 Grimsley filed numerous (twelve by this filing) extraordinary writ petitions in the Florida Supreme Court challenging those convictions and sentences; none granted relief and many were dismissed as frivolous or inappropriate.
- In this petition Grimsley sought habeas corpus relief alleging fundamental trial-court jurisdictional errors; the Court found the filing to be another collateral attack improperly brought by habeas.
- The Court treated the petition as frivolous and part of a repetitive filing pattern and issued an order to show cause under State v. Spencer why he should not be barred from future pro se filings related to these cases.
- Grimsley’s response asserted good-faith access-to-courts, lack of prior warning, and that prison law clerks prepared filings; the Court found his response insufficient.
- The Court barred future pro se filings by Grimsley related to the specified case numbers unless signed by counsel in good standing, and directed transmission of the opinion to DOC under the statute for possible disciplinary action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether habeas corpus was a proper vehicle for collateral attack on nonjurisdictional trial errors | Grimsley argued fundamental jurisdictional errors justified habeas | State argued collateral claims must be raised under rule 3.850 and habeas is improper except in limited circumstances | Court: Habeas was unauthorized for these claims; rule 3.850 is the proper vehicle (Baker) |
| Whether the petition was frivolous and repetitive warranting sanctions | Grimsley claimed good-faith filings and access-to-courts rights | State showed multiple prior dismissals for same issues; filings were frivolous and repetitive | Court: Petition frivolous; pattern of abuse established; sanctions appropriate |
| Whether the asserted errors were cognizable under rule 3.850 | Grimsley maintained the errors were fundamental and cognizable | State contended the alleged errors are not cognizable under rule 3.850 | Court: Alleged errors not cognizable under rule 3.850 (McCrae; Baker) |
| Whether Grimsley should be barred from future pro se filings and referred for DOC action | Grimsley opposed a pro se bar and DOC referral | State urged barred filing status and DOC referral under the statute for frivolous proceedings | Court: Ordered clerk to reject future pro se filings related to listed case numbers unless signed by Florida Bar member; directed DOC notification under statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004) (habeas is improper vehicle for nonjurisdictional collateral claims)
- Pettway v. State, 776 So. 2d 930 (Fla. 2000) (procedural standards for dismissal of frivolous filings)
- McCrae v. State, 437 So. 2d 1388 (Fla. 1983) (scope of relief under postconviction relief rules)
- State v. Spencer, 751 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1999) (procedure for showing cause and imposing filing restrictions on repetitive prisoners)