Washington v. State

Charlie T. Washington appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his Rule 3.800(a) motion, his fourth such motion.1 The trial court found Washington’s instant motion was successive and an abuse of process because it “appears he is again claiming that he should have received a guideline as opposed to a departure sentence and that his sentences exceed the statutory maximum for the particular offenses.” The court further cautioned Washington that “further like motions may result in an order to show cause why [he] should not be barred from further pro se filings.” We agree and affirm.

This…