Full Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 1, 2020. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D20-499 Lower Tribunal No. 06-4563C ________________ Marcus J. Harris, Petitioner, vs. The State of Florida, Respondent. A Case of Original Jurisdiction—Mandamus. Marcus J. Harris, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for respondent. Before SALTER, SCALES and MILLER, JJ. PER CURIAM. Petitioner Marcus Harris, acting pro se, seeks from this Court what Harris characterizes as a writ of mandamus. While Harris’s petition requests an order directing the lower court “to produce authentic documentation to justify its denial of prior credit before probation violation,” what Harris’s petition essentially seeks is further review by this Court of the trial court’s orders denying Harris’s post- conviction motions seeking additional jail credit. On November 2, 2018, the trial court entered a detailed order explaining its rationale for denying Harris’s first post-conviction motion seeking additional jail credit. Harris appealed this November 2018 order, and this Court affirmed the trial court’s order. Harris v. State, 271 So. 3d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (table). Harris then filed a second post-conviction motion that, in part, again sought additional jail credit. On April 18, 2019, the trial court entered another detailed order denying Harris’s second post-conviction motion. Harris appealed this order, and this Court affirmed the trial court’s April 2019 order. Harris v. State, No, 3D19-953, 2019 WL 2880495 (Fla. 3d July 3, 2019). 1 Dressed as a petition seeking mandamus relief, Harris’s petition again challenges the trial court’s denial of his post-conviction motions seeking additional jail credit. We dismiss Harris’s petition because this Court has twice affirmed the trial court’s denial of Harris’s post-conviction effort to obtain additional jail credit. 1 The Florida Supreme Court dismissed Harris’s challenge to this Court’s affirmance of the trial court’s April 2019 order. Harris v. State, No. SC19-1439 (Fla. Aug. 27, 2019). 2 Once a trial court’s order has been affirmed by the appellate court, it becomes the law of the case. See Kelly v. State, 907 So. 2d 550, 551 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). We caution Harris that further challenges in this Court to the trial court’s November 2018 and April 2019 orders may result in an order from this Court prohibiting Harris from further pro se filings. Petition dismissed. 3