Opinion
Case No. SC11-664.
May 16, 2011.
The petitioner has filed a petition seeking relief in this Court.
To the extent the petitioner seeks to invoke all writs jurisdiction, the petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the petitioner has failed to cite an independent basis that would allow the Court to exercise its all writs authority and no such basis is apparent on the face of the petition. See Williams v. State, 913 So. 2d 541, 543-44 (Fla. 2005); St. Paul Title Ins. Corp. v. Davis, 392 So. 2d 1304, 1305 (Fla. 1980); see also Fla. Senate v. Graham, 412 So. 2d 360, 361(Fla. 1982) (stating that "all writs" jurisdiction permits review of matters and issuance of writs necessary to aid in the exercise of the Court's "ultimate jurisdiction").
To the extent the petitioner seeks leave to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis, the petition is denied because the writ of error coram nobis has been abolished under Florida law. See Wood v. State, 750 So. 2d 592, 595 (Fla. 1999) (stating the need for the writ of error coram nobis is eliminated); State v. Woods, 400 So. 2d 456, 457 (Fla. 1981) (stating the writ of error coram nobis is abolished in civil cases).
Any motions or other requests for relief are also denied.
PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.