Opinion
Case No. SC03-2121.
September 29, 2004.
Lower Tribunal Nos. 1D03-3317, 1D03-2239.
The petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied because the petitioner has not demonstrated that he is entitled to mandamus relief.See Pettway v. State, 776 So. 2d 930, 931 (Fla. 2000) (holding that this Court "will generally not consider the repetitive petitions of persons who have abused the judicial processes of the lower courts such that they have been barred from filing certain actions there"); Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000) (holding that in order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, the petitioner must show that he has a clear legal right to the requested relief, the respondent has an indisputable legal duty to perform the requested action, and no other adequate remedy is available). All pending motions in this case are hereby denied.
WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE and BELL, JJ., concur.