Court Filings
6 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
Joseph Edward Jordan v. State of Florida
The Fifth District granted Joseph Edward Jordan’s petition for certiorari, concluding the trial court wrongly allowed the State to conduct a mental-health examination for a Hurst resentencing despite the State’s failure to give written notice within 45 days of arraignment. The court held that Florida statute §782.04(1)(b) and rule 3.181 require notice within 45 days of arraignment, and that the phrase “timely written notice” in rule 3.202 must be read to mean the statutorily mandated 45-day deadline. Because the trial court’s order conflicted with the statute and rule and would cause irreparable harm, the petition was granted.
Criminal AppealGrantedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida5D2025-1210People v. Mohammed
The Court of Appeal held that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to increase defendant Sami Wayne Mohammed’s sentence after execution of his original sentence had begun. Mohammed initially received an aggregate seven-year, four-month term on January 12, 2024. The CDCR later notified the trial court that parts of that sentence were unauthorized under the Three Strikes law, and the trial court resentenced Mohammed on October 21, 2024 to an aggregate 10 years, eight months. The appellate court concluded the trial court could not lawfully resentence him after jurisdiction had ended, treated the appeal as a habeas petition, granted relief, and ordered reinstatement of the January 12, 2024 sentence.
Criminal AppealGrantedCalifornia Court of AppealH052908Leon N. Wiley, Jr. v. State of Florida
The Fifth District Court of Appeal granted Leon N. Wiley, Jr.'s pro se petition for a belated appeal. The court treated its opinion as the notice of appeal from the February 27, 2024 order denying Wiley's motions for postconviction relief in Flagler County Circuit Court Case No. 2019-CF-000303, and directed that a copy be filed with the trial court. The petition was granted under the Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure governing belated appeals, allowing Wiley to pursue appellate review despite missing the original appeal deadline.
Criminal AppealGrantedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida5D2026-0863Bobo v. Appellate Division of Super. Ct.
The Court of Appeal granted a writ of mandate directing the appellate division to reverse its summary denial and order the superior court to reconsider petitioner Aimee Bobo’s request for misdemeanor diversion under Penal Code section 1001.95. Bobo had been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter after running a red light and killing another driver. The trial court denied diversion solely because her negligent conduct caused a death. The appellate court held that denial based only on facts inherent in the offense improperly ignored the statute’s rehabilitative purposes and thus was an abuse of discretion.
Criminal AppealGrantedCalifornia Court of AppealD087393James Lampru v. State of Georgia
The Georgia Court of Appeals granted James Lampru's application for discretionary appeal on April 17, 2026. The court allowed the appellant to file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the order and directed the Superior Court clerk to include this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals. The order is procedural: it accepts review and sets steps for the appeal record and filing, without addressing the merits of the underlying case.
Criminal AppealGrantedCourt of Appeals of GeorgiaA26D0452People v. Super. Ct. 4//16/26 CA4/2
The Court of Appeal granted the People’s petition for a writ of mandate and ordered the trial court to vacate its August 12, 2025 denial of an amended statement of disqualification (ASD) and to disqualify Judge Samah Shouka. The People sought disqualification because Judge Shouka had been a Riverside County deputy district attorney in the homicide unit and had participated in staffing and charging decisions relevant to a pending Racial Justice Act evidentiary hearing about whether the district attorney’s office disproportionately files death-penalty or special-circumstance charges. The appellate court concluded that a person aware of those facts might reasonably doubt the judge’s ability to be impartial, requiring disqualification under CCP §170.1(a)(6)(A)(iii).
Criminal AppealGrantedCalifornia Court of AppealE086779