Shieh v. Kakita, 517 U.S. 343, 2 (1996) (per curiam)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2

344

SHIEH v. KAKITA

Stevens, J., dissenting

U. S. 1170. To date, Shieh has filed 10 petitions in this Court in less than three years. All have been both patently frivolous and denied without recorded dissent.

We enter the order barring prospective filings for the reasons discussed in Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992). Shieh's abuse of the writ of certiorari has been in noncriminal cases, and so we limit our sanction accordingly. The order will not prevent Shieh from petitioning to challenge criminal sanctions which might be imposed against him. The order will, however, allow this Court to devote its limited resources to the claims of petitioners who have not abused our certiorari process.

It is so ordered.

Justice Stevens, dissenting.

For the reasons I have previously expressed, I respectfully dissent. See Jones v. ABC-TV, 516 U. S. 363, 364 (1996) (Stevens, J., dissenting); Attwood v. Singletary, 516 U. S. 297, 298 (1996) (Stevens, J., dissenting); Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1, 4 (1992) (Stevens, J., dissenting); Zatko v. California, 502 U. S. 16, 18 (1991) (Stevens, J., dissenting).

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2

Last modified: October 4, 2007