James L. Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, et al. (506 U.S. 1)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided November 2, 1992 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 506 U.S. 1 · 113 S. Ct. 397
- Decided
- November 2, 1992
- Term
- October Term 1992
- Vote
- 7–2
- Issue area
- Civil Rights
- Disposition
- Petition denied or appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. Pro se petitioner James L. Martin requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis under Rule 39 of this Court. We deny this request pursuant to our Rule 39.8. Martin is allowed until November 23, 1992, within which to pay the-docketing fees required by Rule 38 and to submit his petitions in compliance with this Court’s Rule 33. We also, direct the Clerk not to accept any further petitions for certio-rari from Martin in noncriminal matters unless he pays the docketing fee required by Rule 38 and submits his petition in compliance with Rule 33. Martin is a notorious abuser of this Court’s certiorari process. We first invoked Rule 39.8 to deny Martin in forma pauperis status last November. See Zatko v. California, 502 U. S. 16 (1991) (per curiam). At that time, we noted that Martin had filed 45 petitions in the past 10 years, and 15 in the preceding 2 years alone. Although Martin was granted in forma pauperis status to file these petitions, all of these petitions were denied without recorded dissent. In invoking Rule 39.8, we observed that Martin is “unique — not merely among those who seek to file informa pauperis, but also among those who have paid the required filing fees— because [he has] repeatedly made totally frivolous demands on the Court’s limited resources.” Id., at 18. Unfortunately, Martin has continued in his accustomed ways. Since we first denied him in…
Excerpt of a 4,182-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.