Legal Opinion

Jordan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 20, 2010No. 1D09-6435PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant, Thomas E. Jordan, challenges the trial court’s order barring him from filing future pro se motions. The trial court stated that it was imposing the sanction due to the repetitive nature of Appellant’s motions. However, all of Appellant’s motions have been filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), which allows for the filing of mul tiple motions. A rule 8.800(a) motion cannot be classified as successive unless it raises a claim that has previously been addressed on the merits. State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287, 291 (Fla.2003). In this case, the trial court stopped…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. McBrideSupreme Court of Florida · 2003
  2. Mims v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Gaston v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  2. John F. Casey III v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
  3. WILLIAM E. BYNES v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API