The trial court abused its discretion in ruling that the petitioner’s petition for conditional release from his sexually violent predator (SVP) commitment was frivolous. It did not indisputably lack merit nor was it for delay. The doctors’ report relied upon by the court concerned whether petitioner should be released unconditionally, not conditionally. Moreover, petitioner had undergone chemical castration and completed various programs and classes since those doctors’ reports. Finally, petitioner had not waived his claims regarding conditional release by submitting the issue of his continued commitment as a sexually violent predator on those doctors’ reports, since that was a different proceeding involving a different issue.