Court Filings

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed Antwan D. Johnson's appeal from a Polk County circuit court decision and, in a short per curiam order, affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief, contains no published reasoning, and the panel of judges concurred. The decision was issued April 21, 2026, and notes that it is not final until the time to file a motion for rehearing expires and any timely motion is resolved.

The First District Court of Appeal reviewed Jerry Ray Walker's appeal from a Bay County circuit court decision. After consideration, the panel issued a per curiam opinion affirming the lower court's ruling. No opinion elaborating reasons was published; the judgment of the circuit court stands. The decision was entered April 21, 2026, and the court noted that the mandate is not final until resolution of any timely post-judgment motions under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The First District Court of Appeal reviewed a criminal appeal by appellant Aaroney Okevious Reed from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 21, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's judgment. No published opinion explaining the court's reasoning appears in the document; the court simply announced its disposition and noted concurrence by the three judges. The decision is subject to any timely post-judgment motions permitted by Florida appellate rules.

The First District Court of Appeal issued a one-sentence per curiam decision affirming the lower court's judgment involving appellant Davion Hadden and the State of Florida. The appeal came from the Circuit Court for Leon County, before Judge Stephen Everett. No opinion explaining the court's reasoning or the issues on appeal appears in the document; the court simply affirmed the judgment and noted concurrence by the three judges. The decision is subject to timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.

The Sixth Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the conviction of Justin Clayton Goldthrite for retaliation after reviewing the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial. Goldthrite argued the State failed to comply with two Texas criminal procedure statutes governing discovery and evidence handling (Articles 38.371 and 39.14). The court applied the same legal standard and analysis it used in a companion appeal and concluded the trial court did not err in denying the motion for new trial, so the judgment was affirmed.

The Court of Appeals for the Sixth District of Texas affirmed Justin Clayton Goldthrite’s conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon after the trial court denied his motion for new trial. Goldthrite argued the State failed to disclose incident reports under Texas discovery statutes and that those reports affected the voluntariness of his guilty plea and his ability to use relationship evidence. The court applied Texas precedent holding a guilty plea is voluntary if the defendant had sufficient awareness of circumstances and found Goldthrite was aware of the incidents and had questioned the complaining witness, so no error was shown.

The Court of Appeals affirmed Samuel Leon Dugan’s convictions and life-without-parole sentence under Washington’s Persistent Offender Accountability Act (POAA). Dugan had been convicted after a bench trial of first-degree promoting prostitution (with domestic violence findings), unlawful possession of a firearm, third-degree assault, and harassment. The trial court found two prior qualifying convictions and imposed mandatory LWOP. The court rejected Dugan’s challenges that the POAA is cruel or discriminatorily applied, and rejected his Sixth Amendment claim that a jury should have decided the timing of prior convictions, relying on state precedent allowing judicial factfinding of prior convictions.

The Court of Appeals affirmed Matthew Pajestka’s conviction for operating a vehicle with a prohibited blood alcohol concentration. After two prior remands and appointment of a visiting judge, Pajestka sought a continuance shortly before a November 21, 2024 jury trial because his defense expert was unavailable; the municipal court denied the requests and proceeded. The appellate court held that denial of the continuance was not an abuse of discretion, declined to review ineffective-assistance claims raised on direct appeal because the same firm represented him at trial and on appeal, and found the breath-test evidence sufficient and not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

The Ohio Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed Todd A. Dunlap’s convictions for multiple sexual offenses based on abuse of his niece between about ages 12–14. Dunlap waived a jury; the trial court found him guilty on eight counts and sentenced him to consecutive terms on rape counts, finding him a sexual predator. On appeal he raised ten assignments of error challenging sufficiency and weight of evidence, pre-indictment delay, destroyed evidence, other-acts evidence, indictment specificity, chain of custody, cumulative error, and ineffective assistance. The appellate court found the evidence credible, no actual prejudice from delay or destroyed items, no bad-faith destruction, proper handling of other-acts and chain-of-custody issues, and no ineffective assistance.

The Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Trumbull County Common Pleas Court’s sentence of an aggregate 7-to-10½ year prison term for David Lucero, who pleaded guilty to ten second-degree felony counts involving creation and distribution of sexual material depicting minors. The appellate court reviewed Lucero’s claim that the trial court failed to properly consider sentencing statutes and alternatives to prison but found the trial court expressly stated it considered R.C. 2929.11 and 2929.12, and the imposed sentences fall within the statutory range. Because the record shows consideration of the required factors, the court found no reversible error and affirmed.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the Fairfield County Common Pleas Court's judgment denying relief to Robert Phelps. Phelps had pleaded guilty in 2020 and was sentenced to 15 years under a plea agreement. He later sought recusal of the trial judge; an entry labeled as denying judicial release appeared in filings but was not in the record. Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding the appeal was frivolous. The appellate court found no arguable appealable error, held it lacked authority to review recusal under R.C. 2701.03, granted counsel's motion to withdraw, and affirmed the trial court judgment.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed Kelsey Amos’s conviction for Theft (R.C. 2913.02(A)(1)) after a bench trial. The court reviewed sufficiency and manifest-weight challenges to evidence that Amos aided or abetted a co-defendant (K.B.) who took the victim’s e-bike. The court concluded the record supports a finding that Amos spoke with K.B., positioned the vehicle next to the bike, followed him after the bike was taken, and associated with K.B. before and after the offense; the trial court reasonably credited the prosecution’s theory of complicity and did not err in finding Amos guilty.

The Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court affirmed Bryce Andrews’ convictions and sentence for the murders of his father and stepfather. Andrews challenged the trial court’s order requiring him to submit to a psychological examination by the State’s expert before a suppression hearing on whether his February 5, 2021 statements were voluntary. The court held the order was proper under 725 ILCS 5/115-6 because the facts and circumstances gave reasonable ground to believe a mental-status defense might be raised, and alternatively the court had inherent authority to manage evidentiary presentation. The court also found no prejudice from the examination.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Shaquille Berod Solomon from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's decision without published opinion on April 20, 2026. The court provided no extended reasoning in the opinion beyond the single-word disposition and noted concurrence by the three judges. The decision is subject to any timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in the criminal case of Marlo Michelle Lauritzen. The appeal, from the Circuit Court for Escambia County, was decided per curiam on April 20, 2026, with Judges Lewis, Rowe, and Nordby concurring. The opinion contains a single-line disposition: AFFIRMED. No additional reasoning, issues, or factual background is provided in the published entry.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Michael Shawn Hastings's appeal from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. In a per curiam opinion filed April 20, 2026, the appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief and provides no extended reasoning; the panel unanimously affirmed the trial court's ruling and noted that the decision is not final until any timely authorized post-judgment motion is resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in the criminal case of Shawn Faulk. The appeal arose from a decision by the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County, and the appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, concluded there was no reversible error and left the lower court's ruling in place. No separate written opinion explaining the court's reasoning was published; the court simply issued an affirmance with three judges concurring and noted that the decision is not final until any timely rehearing motions are resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Jerry Lee Dupree's appeal from a Walton County circuit court decision and affirmed the lower court's ruling. The opinion is per curiam, unanimous, and short: the appellate court found no reversible error and therefore left the trial court's judgment in place. The written disposition notes the appeal number, parties, counsel, the judge below, and warns that the decision is not final until any timely motions under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure are resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in the appeal brought by David Eugene Brannen against the State of Florida. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 20, 2026, affirming the judgment of the Baker County Circuit Court. No extended opinion or separate reasoning was published; the panel of judges Lewis, Roberts, and Kelsey concurred. The decision is subject to any timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed De’erik Bell’s appeal from a Bay County circuit court decision. The panel issued a short per curiam opinion on April 20, 2026, affirming the lower court’s judgment. No additional opinion or published reasoning accompanied the disposition; the court simply affirmed the judgment below and noted concurrence by all three judges. The opinion advises that the decision is not final until resolution of any timely, authorized post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.

The Court of Appeals affirmed Frank Estrada III’s conviction for one count of violating a protective order. Estrada was tried on three counts (two assault counts and one protective-order violation); the jury acquitted or deadlocked on the assault counts (mistrial and later dismissal) but convicted on the protective-order violation. Estrada challenged the admission of a 911 recording and EMS medical records and the trial court’s granting of the State’s challenge for cause to Juror 53. The court held the evidentiary rulings were not reversible error and that, although the trial court abused its discretion in excusing Juror 53 for cause, that mistake did not harm Estrada’s substantial rights, so the conviction stands.

The Court of Appeals for the Sixth District of Texas affirmed the trial court’s judgment that had adjudicated Debrah Elizabeth East guilty of possession of less than one gram of methamphetamine after she violated terms of deferred adjudication community supervision. The State proved she used controlled substances and failed to complete restitution; after a hearing the trial court imposed a nine-month state jail sentence. Appellate counsel found no nonfrivolous issues and filed an Anders brief; the appeals court independently reviewed the record, concluded the appeal was frivolous, and affirmed, granting counsel permission to withdraw.

A Lamar County jury convicted Andrew McCarty of indecency with a child by sexual contact. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment and the written judgment also included a $50 payment to the Children’s Advocacy Center and listed the offense as a second-degree felony. The Court of Appeals held the oral sentence—life imprisonment with no fine—controls, so the $50.00 entry must be deleted from the written judgment. The court also corrected the degree entry to reflect that the second-degree conviction was enhanced to first degree. The judgment was affirmed as modified.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order granting defendant Tonya Newberry a new trial after a jury convicted her of furnishing contraband and crossing a guard line. The State argued the grant was premature because no judgment had been entered, that the trial court misapplied the thirteenth-juror standard, and that the judge should have been recused. The court held the premature order was not void, found no abuse of discretion in granting a new trial on weight-of-the-evidence grounds given conflicting witness credibility and lack of video, and declined to review the recusal denial because it was entered after the State’s appeal.

The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court's denial of Raymond Warren’s application for postconviction DNA testing of three shell casings. Warren had sought testing for touch DNA after his 1995 murder conviction; the trial court initially denied testing, this court remanded for further factfinding about whether the casings remained suitable for testing, and on remand the trial court again denied the application. The appeals court found no abuse of discretion because testing authorities concluded the casings were at substantial risk of contamination and the record did not show the parent samples remained scientifically suitable for testing.

The Second District Court of Appeals affirmed the Greene County Common Pleas judgment. William J. Sawyer, bound over from juvenile court, pleaded guilty to rape and related sexual-offense charges and received a four-to-six year prison term and Tier III sex-offender classification. On appeal he argued the juvenile court erred by transferring him for adult prosecution and the trial court erred by denying suppression motions. The court held Sawyer waived suppression challenges by pleading guilty and concluded the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in finding him not amenable to juvenile rehabilitation based on the statutory factors and expert testimony.

The Second District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s restitution order requiring Jermaine Reynolds to pay $3,067 to his domestic-violence victim for medical expenses. Reynolds had pleaded guilty to misdemeanor domestic violence; the felony strangulation count was dismissed. The trial court relied on the presentence investigation report (which included the victim’s impact statement and three medical bills showing $3,067.54 owed) when ordering restitution. Because Reynolds did not object below, the appeals court reviewed only for plain error and concluded the PSI provided competent, sufficient evidence to support the restitution award.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's denial of Dennis Crowley's motion to suppress evidence found during a traffic stop. Officer Webb stopped Crowley on May 7, 2025 for a loud muffler in violation of Ohio law, and an inventory search of the towed vehicle uncovered powdered cocaine. The appellate court held the stop was supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion because Officer Webb observed and the body-camera recorded an audible rumble from the exhaust consistent with R.C. 4513.22(A). The conviction (no contest plea) and community-control sentence were left intact.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed a Philadelphia County PCRA court order granting Jamal R. Sanders a new trial. Sanders had been convicted in 1998 of third-degree murder and related offenses based largely on testimony that he had access to the gun later used by a co-defendant. After decades in custody, a witness (Shawn Clark) submitted an affidavit recanting trial testimony and stating detectives coerced him; Clark later died. The PCRA court found the recantation admissible under the statement-against-interest exception and likely to produce a different verdict; the Superior Court agreed and affirmed.

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the convictions and sentences of Kylen Pratt, who was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder, possession of an instrument of crime, abuse of a corpse, and tampering with evidence for the death and burning of Naasire Johnson. The court rejected challenges to (1) admission of a detective’s chart summarizing voluminous cell-phone timing data, finding the summary met the rules for admissibility; (2) admission of appellant’s Google searches, finding they were relevant to his state of mind and not unduly prejudicial; and (3) the discretionary imposition of consecutive sentences, finding no abuse of sentencing discretion.