ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
We elect to treat Jones’ petition for reinstatement due to newly discovered evidence as a motion for rehearing, and deny it. There are two reasons for our denial: 1) it is untimely, having been filed 33 days after this court’s order dismissing the original petition; and 2) it is improper to raise new issues in a motion for rehearing as this motion attempts to do. See Araujo v. State, 452 So.2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).
Because of Jones’ numerous filings in this court, we caution Jones against filing additional successive and improper pleadings.1 Further abuse of the appellate process may subject Jones to an order barring him from filing any additional pro se pleadings in this court, regarding his criminal case.
DENIED.
SHARP, W., SAWAYA, and MONACO, JJ., concur.