Bernard Bonner (“Bonner”), appeals from the trial court’s orders denying his petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and his Motion for Rehearing thereon. We affirm.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On March 1, 2001, in case number F01-18283, Bonner was found guilty, after a jury trial, on the charges of: count 1. burglary with a battery or assault; count 3. Battery; and count 4. kidnapping. Bonner was thereafter sentenced to consecutive life sentences on counts 1 and 4, and to 364 days in county jail on count 3. Bonner appealed his conviction and it was affirmed. See Bonner v. State, 868 So.2d 529 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004).

Since that time, Bonner has filed numerous pro se motions challenging his convictions and sentences, all of which were denied. Bonner has also filed 12 appeals in his case, including six since 2011.1 Those appeals include case number 3D14-184, which raised claims virtually identical to the claims raised in this appeal. As a result, we now order Bonner to show good cause within forty-five days from the date of this opinion why he should not be prohibited from filing further pro se proceedings in this Court concerning his convic*433tions and sentences in the above-cited case.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

On December 16, 2015, this Court issued an opinion denying Bernard Bonner’s (“Bonner”) petition for writ of habeas corpus and his motion for rehearing thereon. Bonner has moved for rehearing of that denial. We deny that motion for rehearing.

In addition, our opinion contained an order to show cause why Bonner should not be prohibited from filing with this Court any further pro se appeals, petitions, motions or other proceedings related to his criminal sentencing in circuit court case number F01-18283. Bonner filed his response on January 29, 2015 but failed therein to show good cause to justify further pro se filings of appeals, petitions, motions, and other pleadings with this Court.

We must balance Bonner’s pro se right of access to courts.with the Court’s need to devote its finite resources to legitimate appeals, recognizing the seriousness of the sanction when the litigant is a criminal defendant. State v. Spencer, 751 So.2d 47, 48 (Fla. 1999). After an order to show cause and an opportunity to respond, a court may prevent such further filings. Id.

It is hereby ordered that the Clerk of the Court of the Third District Court of Appeal shall refuse further pro se filings related to case number F01-18283; provided, however, that filings related to case number F01-18283 may be accepted by the Clerk if such filings have been reviewed and signed by an attorney who is a licensed member of the Florida Bar in good standing.

Any further and unauthorized pro se filings by Bonner will subject him to sanctions, including the issuance of written findings forwarded to the Florida Department of Corrections for consideration by it for disciplinary action, pursuant to section 944.279(1) of the Florida Statutes.

Order issued.