Full Opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________ No. 1D21-3207 _____________________________ ROOSEVELT CARROLL JR., Appellant, v. RICKY D. DIXON, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Appellee. _____________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradford County. James M. Colaw, Judge. February 16, 2022 PER CURIAM. Roosevelt Carroll, Jr., again brings an appeal of an order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his 2006 conviction. The petition alleged that the evidence was insufficient to prove second-degree murder because the State failed to prove that the stab wound Carroll inflicted on the victim caused the victim’s death. The trial court properly treated the petition as a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and summarily denied the motion. We affirm. In 2016, we affirmed the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus wherein Carroll had similarly alleged that the evidence in this case was insufficient. Carroll v. State, 192 So. 3d 525 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). There, we noted that Carroll had raised the same postconviction claims in the past without any success. Id. at 526. Concluding that the appeal should never have been filed, we found that it was frivolous and directed the Clerk to forward a copy of the opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections for appropriate disciplinary action. Id. at 527. The opinion also cautioned Carroll that “additional frivolous postconviction appeals or petitions may result in an order barring him from further pro se filings in this court pertaining to his 2006 conviction.” Id. Despite that warning, Carroll filed another petition for writ of habeas corpus in this case in August 2021. We find that the petition filed 2021 was meritless and this appeal is frivolous. See Hall v. State, 94 So. 3d 655, 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (“Untimely post-conviction challenges, which do not establish an exception to the two-year time limit, are abusive and sanctionable, and an appeal from the denial of an untimely claim is frivolous when no arguable basis for an exception to the time limitation exists.” (quoting Johnson v. State, 44 So. 3d 198, 200 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b); Calloway v. State, 699 So. 2d 849, 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (“A petition for habeas corpus cannot be used to circumvent the two-year period for filing motions for postconviction relief.”). Carroll’s claim could not support postconviction relief. See Johnson v. State, 985 So. 2d 1215, 1215 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (rejecting claim that evidence was insufficient to prove the offense because such a claim was not cognizable in a collateral postconviction motion). Accordingly, we direct the Clerk to forward a certified copy of this opinion to the Florida Department of Corrections for disciplinary procedures pursuant to the rules of the Department as provided in section 944.279, Florida Statutes. See Ibarra v. State, 45 So. 3d 911, 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (stating that a show cause order is not required for the imposition of sanctions under section 944.279). AFFIRMED. ROBERTS, RAY, and BILBREY, JJ., concur. 2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________ Roosevelt Carroll Jr., pro se, Appellant. No appearance for Appellee. 3