Original Proceeding - Writ of Error Coram Nobis
Preston Leonard Schofield, pro se, Tampa, Florida, for
appearance for Respondent
case is before the Court following dismissal of Preston
Leonard Schofield's pro se petition for writ of error
coram nobis. On February 21, 2018, we dismissed the petition
and expressly retained jurisdiction to exercise our inherent
judicial authority to pursue sanctions against Schofield for
his abuse of this Court's limited resources. See
Pettway v. McNeil, 987 So.2d 20, 22 (Fla. 2008); see
also Fla. R. App. P. 9.410(a) (Sanctions; Court's
Motion). Because Schofield had filed thirty-five other
meritless petitions and notices with this Court since 2013,
we ordered him to show cause why he should not be barred from
filing further pro se requests for relief in this Court
relating to circuit and county court case numbers
522014CF014665XXXXPC, and 592011MM004272A000XX. See
Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2281 (Fla. Feb. 21, 2018).
We now find that Schofield has failed to show cause why he
should not be barred, and we sanction him as set forth below.
has filed with this Court thirty-five other petitions and
notices challenging various convictions and sentences, as
well as various family court orders pertaining to child
custody and other divorce matters. This Court has never granted
Schofield the relief sought in any of his filings here. Each
of his thirty-five other petitions and notices has been
denied, dismissed, or transferred to another court for
consideration; his petition in this case is no exception.
filed the instant petition for writ of error coram nobis with
this Court on December 25, 2017. In it, he challenged a 2015
conviction and sentence for assault, and argued that the
trial court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the charge
against him. Because the writ of error coram nobis no longer
exists in Florida, on February 21, 2018, we dismissed the
petition pursuant to Wood v. State, 750 So.2d 592,
595 (Fla. 1999). In so doing, we expressly retained
jurisdiction to consider the imposition of sanctions, and in
accordance with State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47 (Fla.
1999), ordered Schofield to show cause why he should not be
prohibited from filing further pro se requests for relief
with this Court.
than file a timely response to the Court's order,
Schofield filed a petition for writ of prohibition on March
26, 2018, see Schofield v. Schofield, No. SC18-475,
followed on March 29, 2018, by a motion in the instant case.
In the motion, Schofield simply reiterates the arguments that
he raised in his most recent batch of petitions that he filed
with this Court, which were all meritless and ultimately
dismissed. See Schofield v. State, No. SC17-2281
(Fla. Feb. 21, 2018); Schofield v. State, No.
SC17-2280, 2018 WL 862941 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018); Schofield
v. State, No. SC17-2279, 2018 WL 862786 (Fla. Feb. 14,
2018); Schofield v. Schofield, No. SC17-2278, 2018
WL 859763 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018); Schofield v. State,
No. SC17-2277, 2018 WL 859605 (Fla. Feb. 14, 2018). We hereby
deny Schofield's motion. Additionally, on April 12, 2018,
the Court issued an order transferring Schofield's
prohibition petition to the Fifth District Court of Appeal
for consideration by that court. Schofield v.
Schofield, No. SC18-475, 2018 WL 1750897 (Fla. Apr. 12,
2018). Neither of these new filings, however, contain any
justification for Schofield's continued abuse of this
Court's limited resources by filing numerous meritless
pro se petitions and notices.
as a result of Schofield's extensive history of filing
meritless pro se petitions and notices in this Court, we
hereby find that Schofield has abused this Court's
limited judicial resources, and has failed to show cause why
this Court should not impose sanctions for his repeated
frivolous filings. It is clear that if left unrestrained, he
will continue his pattern of filing meritless petitions in
this Court. Accordingly, we direct the Clerk of this Court to
reject any future pleadings or other requests for relief
regarding circuit and county court case numbers
522014CF014665XXXXPC, and 592011MM004272A000XX, submitted by
Preston Leonard Schofield unless such filings are signed by a
member in good standing of The Florida Bar. Henceforth,
Schofield may only petition this Court through the assistance
of counsel whenever such counsel determines that the
proceedings have merit and can be filed in good faith.
motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained by
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON,
and LAWSON, JJ, concur