Court Filings

The District Court of Appeal, Second District of Florida, affirmed the judgment below in a criminal appeal by Rashad Taylor from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County. The appeal was filed under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The per curiam opinion, joined by all judges, issues a brief disposition affirming the lower court's decision without published opinion and notes the opinion may be revised before official publication.

The Second District Court of Appeal of Florida reviewed an appeal by Rashad J. Taylor from a Hillsborough County circuit court under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The appellate court issued a per curiam decision affirming the lower court's ruling. The opinion is brief, gives no published reasoning beyond the affirmation, and notes that the opinion may be revised before official publication.

The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in an appeal by Gary Swain. Swain, appearing pro se, sought review under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 29, 2026, concluding that the circuit court's ruling should be upheld. No published opinion or extended reasoning was provided in the document; the panel of judges concurred and the judgment was affirmed.

The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, affirmed a lower-court decision in a criminal matter. The appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the County Court for Pinellas County. The per curiam opinion states simply: Affirmed. Three judges concurred. No further reasoning, facts, or citation details are provided in the document.

The Second District Court of Appeal reviewed a pro se appeal by Darrell Anthony Patterson, Jr., from a Pinellas County circuit court order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 29, 2026, affirming the lower court's decision. No published opinion or extended explanation of reasoning appears in the document; the panel simply affirmed the judgment of the circuit court and the decision is subject to revision before official publication.

The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision in a pro se criminal appeal by John H. Paschal. The appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from a Pinellas County circuit court order. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision, with three judges concurring, and affirmed the lower court's ruling without published opinion or extended reasoning. The judgment resolves the appeal against Paschal and leaves the circuit court's order intact.

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reviewed a pro se criminal appeal by Kenneth E. Mills from the circuit court in Pinellas County under the rule for appeals in criminal cases. After considering the record, the panel issued a per curiam decision affirming the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief, provides no published reasoning, and notes it may be revised before official publication. The judges concurred and the decision was entered on April 29, 2026.

The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's decision in an appeal brought by Charles E. Lovett, Jr. The appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) and reviewed an order from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County before Judge Philip James Federico. The court issued a brief per curiam decision—joined by Chief Judge Lucas and Judges Khouzam and Sleet—stating simply: Affirmed. No further reasoning or opinion was published in this decision as presented.

The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's judgment in a criminal postconviction appeal by Kenneth James Kendrick. The court issued a short per curiam decision noting the appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) and concluding affirmation without published opinion. The panel (Lucas, Khouzam, and Sleet) concurred. No further reasoning or factual discussion appears in the published entry.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a County Court decision in a case between appellant Shella Lucien and appellee Pablo Martinez Ruiz. The appellate court, writing per curiam, concluded that Lucien failed to provide an adequate record for appellate review. Citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, the court explained that without a sufficient record it cannot resolve factual disputes or determine that the trial judge misapplied the law, so reversal is not warranted.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of Edwin Proano's motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(b) after an evidentiary hearing. The appellate court deferred to the trial court's credibility findings, accepted trial counsel's tactical explanation for not calling a responding officer, and concluded there was competent, substantial evidence that no formal six-year plea offer existed. Because the record showed reasonable strategic choices and insufficient prejudice from counsel's actions, the court affirmed the lower court's ruling denying relief.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the county court’s denial of appellant Evan Neil Brooks’s motion to suppress evidence seized after a traffic stop. An officer on foot patrol in a crowded entertainment district observed Brooks accelerate, drive faster than surrounding traffic, and pass another vehicle by entering the opposite lane near many pedestrians. The court held those facts, viewed in context, provided probable cause to stop Brooks for careless driving under section 316.1925(1), and the officer’s observations of impairment after the stop supported Brooks’s DUI arrest. The appellate court deferred to the trial court’s factual findings and reviewed legal conclusions de novo.

The Third District Court of Appeal issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 29, 2026, affirming the judgment of the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court in the appeal brought by Walter B. Campbell. The appeal proceeded under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). No published opinion or extended reasoning is provided in the document; the court simply states the disposition as "Affirmed."

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a criminal appeal brought by Oliver Thomas. The appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from decisions of the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County (Judge Richard Hersch). The opinion is per curiam, filed April 29, 2026, and states simply 'Affirmed.' No further reasoning or discussion appears in the opinion text provided.

The Third District Court of Appeal considered an appeal by Norman Williams from a Miami-Dade County circuit court decision. The appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The appellate court, in a per curiam decision, affirmed the lower court's ruling. No published opinion or extended reasoning appears in the filed entry; the judgment simply affirms the trial court's disposition and notes the decision is not final until any timely rehearing motion is resolved.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a civil case between appellant Kazi Ahmed and appellee Krzysztof Duszka. The appeal arose from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, and both parties appeared pro se. The per curiam opinion is brief and simply states the appeal is affirmed without published reasoning in the opinion. The ruling is subject to possible change if a timely motion for rehearing is filed.

The Third District Court of Appeal reviewed a criminal appeal by Jose D. Alcazar from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County under Florida appellate rules. The panel, in a brief per curiam decision, affirmed the lower court's judgment. No opinion explaining the court's reasoning or the issues decided was published; the decision was entered on April 29, 2026, subject to any timely motion for rehearing.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a non-final circuit court order in a civil case where appellant Fernando Costantini Gomes sought to pursue punitive damages under Florida’s vulnerable-adult statutes. The panel held that the statutory framework permits a vulnerable adult to recover actual and punitive damages for abuse, neglect, or exploitation, but a plaintiff must make a reasonable showing in the record (or by proffer) that the defendant’s conduct amounted to intentional misconduct or gross negligence to justify punitive damages. Applying those standards, the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision in a dispute between Emilie Gonzalez and others (appellants) and Maria Del Pilar Alvarez (appellee). The appellate court concluded the record was insufficient to overturn the lower court and deferred to the trial judge's exercise of discretion. Citing precedent, the court explained that without a trial record the appellate court cannot resolve factual disputes or find an abuse of discretion, so the lower court's ruling stands.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a criminal appeal brought by Drakar Lamar Smith against the State of Florida. The opinion, filed April 29, 2026, is per curiam and brief: the court announced its disposition as "Affirmed" without published reasoning in this short opinion. The decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a non-final circuit court order in a civil case between appellant Carlos A. Zarraluqui and appellees Fetes & Events, Inc., et al. The appeal arose from a 2023 Miami-Dade County proceeding and was argued by counsel for both sides. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision, simply stating 'Affirmed,' without published opinion or extended reasoning in this document. The judgment affirms the lower court's non-final ruling, and the mandate will follow after disposition of any timely motion for rehearing.

The appellate court reviewed Marie Fleurima's appeal from a Broward County circuit court final judgment. Because Fleurima did not provide a trial transcript and the offered statement of the evidence lacked the trial court's required approval under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(5), the Fourth District limited its review to errors apparent on the face of the final judgment and found none. The court therefore affirmed the trial court's judgment. The opinion cites Edman v. Edman as controlling precedent and notes the decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of Justin Pantzer's Florida Rule 3.800 postconviction motion. The panel relied on recent Florida precedent holding that a 2024 U.S. Supreme Court decision (Erlinger) — even if a change in the law — does not apply retroactively, so Pantzer's claim based on that decision fails. The court cited Wainwright v. State and related Florida authority in reaching its decision and noted that the opinion is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed Shaun Patrick Stewart's appeal from a Sumter County circuit court decision and, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief; the court issued a short ruling without published reasoning and all three judges concurred. The decision notes that it is not final until any timely, authorized post-decision motions are resolved under Florida appellate rules. No additional factual or legal analysis is included in the opinion.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed Gregory Simpson's appeal from a Marion County circuit court postconviction proceeding under Florida Rule 3.800. The court, in a brief per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's decision, citing Galindez v. State and Washington v. Recuenco to support its ruling. No appellee appearance was entered and the appellant proceeded pro se. The opinion concludes the appellate court saw no reversible error and affirmed the circuit court's disposition without extended discussion.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision in a dispute between the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (appellant) and A & B Verma Family, LLC (appellee). The appeal arose from a Volusia County circuit court ruling; the appellate panel issued a brief per curiam opinion affirming the lower court's judgment without published opinion. All three judges concurred. The mandate notes that the decision is not final until any timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules are resolved.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed Erique Goshay's appeal from his criminal conviction and sentence in Duval County. After considering the briefs and record, the appellate court issued a per curiam opinion that affirms the lower court's decision without published opinion or stated reasons. The judgment of the circuit court is left in place and the panel of judges unanimously concurred. The opinion notes that it is not final until any timely post-opinion motions are resolved.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a pro se appeal by David Charles Sussman. The appeal challenged actions involving the Assistant State Attorney, a circuit judge, and the Assistant Attorney General. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision affirming the circuit court without published opinion or extended reasoning. The opinion is final subject to timely authorized post-judgment motions under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in a criminal case. Calvin W. Thomas appealed a Seminole County circuit court decision; the appellate panel issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 28, 2026, simply stating AFFIRMED. The court did not elaborate its reasoning in the published entry and the three-judge panel concurred. No additional factual findings, legal analysis, or instructions were included in the opinion.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed Antonio Christopher Youngblood's appeal from a Duval County circuit court criminal case. The appellate court, in a brief per curiam decision, affirmed the lower court's judgment. No published opinion or extended reasoning is provided in the document; the court simply issued an affirmance with all three judges concurring. The decision becomes final unless a timely, authorized motion for rehearing or certification is filed under Florida appellate rules.