Court Filings

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in the criminal case of Christopher Coaxum. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 28, 2026, concluding that the lower court's ruling should stand. No published opinion, explanation, or separate opinion accompanied the affirmance; the panel judges Nardella, Smith, and Kamoutsas concurred. The appellant was represented by counsel from Cohen Law, P.A., and the State by assistant attorneys general. The decision is subject to the normal rehearing deadline.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a Lee County family-law case. Appellant Stacy James (pro se) appealed the circuit court's ruling below; the appellate court issued a per curiam opinion on April 28, 2026, simply stating "AFFIRMED." No additional reasoning or discussion is provided in the opinion, and the panel's judges concurred. Both parties appeared pro se in the appeal. The mandate will issue after the rehearing period expires if no timely motion is filed.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed two consolidated appeals from a circuit court order in Osceola County. The appellants, Shawn Michael Simmerer and Charlee McPherson, appearing pro se, sought reversal of the lower court's decision. The appellate court, in a brief per curiam opinion, affirmed the trial court's ruling without published opinion or extended discussion. The panel (Stargel, White, and Brownlee, JJ.) concurred and the opinion notes the time for filing a motion for rehearing has not yet expired.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's judgment in a civil case brought by Robert Lee King, Jr. against Mark S. Brown, M.D., Premier Men's Medical Center of Orlando, LLC, and OPS International, Inc. d/b/a Olympia Pharmaceuticals. The appellate court issued a short per curiam opinion, noting only the affirmance without elaboration. The decision means the trial court's ruling stands and the appellant's grounds for reversal were rejected by the appellate panel. No further reasoning or factual findings are provided in the published entry.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed Quantavious Piglor's appeal from a Polk County circuit court criminal matter and unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision. The opinion is per curiam, brief, and provides no extended reasoning in the published entry. The panel of Judges White, Brownlee, and Kamoutsas concurred. The public defender and assistant attorney general represented the parties. The court's judgment affirms the trial court judgment or order under review and ends this stage of the appeal unless a timely rehearing is filed.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed Kristavion J. Harris's appeal from a Polk County circuit court criminal case and issued a one-line per curiam decision affirming the lower court's ruling. The opinion contains no published reasoning beyond the formal disposition and concurrence by the three judges. The appellate court therefore upheld the trial court's judgment and sentence without further explanation, and the mandate will issue after the rehearing period expires or is resolved.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal from the County Court for Orange County in a case brought by Kayla Williams against Darius S. Dantzler. The appellate court, in a per curiam decision dated April 28, 2026, affirmed the lower court's judgment. No published opinion or reasoning is provided in the decision sheet; the court's brief entry simply states the judgment is affirmed and notes the time to file a motion for rehearing has not yet expired.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed Judith Ivette Torres Garcia's appeal from the Polk County Circuit Court and issued a per curiam decision affirming the lower court's judgment. The panel unanimously agreed to affirm the decision of the trial court. No opinion text or reasoning is included in the document beyond the formal affirmance and the names of the judges and counsel. The mandate is subject to the ordinary rehearing period described at the end of the opinion.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's judgment in a criminal appeal by Juan Figueroa-Rivera. The appeal was taken under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the circuit court in Osceola County. The appellate court issued a short per curiam decision on April 28, 2026, simply stating 'AFFIRMED' without extended opinion. The panel of judges concurred and the appellant proceeded pro se; the state did not file a response on appeal.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in a criminal case. Eric Alexander Roe appealed a Polk County conviction (lower tribunal 2021-CF-005791). The appellate court issued a short per curiam decision on April 28, 2026, concluding the trial court's rulings should stand. No extended opinion or detailed reasoning was published; the panel issued a simple affirmance with all three judges concurring.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Emily L. Tanner from a Lee County circuit court decision. The appellate court issued a short per curiam decision on April 28, 2026, simply stating the judgment is AFFIRMED. The opinion contains no published reasoning beyond the affirmance and notes concurrence by the three judges. Counsel appearances are listed for appellant and some appellees, while two corporate appellees made no appearance.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court for Polk County in the criminal case of Carleton E. Boyce, III. The appeal was briefed and argued by the public defender and the state; the district court issued a per curiam opinion, announcing affirmation without published opinion or extended discussion. The panel (Stargel, White, and Mize, JJ.) concurred. No separate analysis, holdings, or reasons are provided in the short decision beyond the affirmance.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the trial court's judgment in the criminal case of Jerrell Lamont Smith. The appeal, taken from the Marion County Circuit Court, was considered on the briefs and oral argument, and the appellate panel issued a per curiam decision simply stating "AFFIRMED." No extended opinion or new legal analysis was published in the decision; the judges concurred and directed that the decision is not final until any timely, authorized post-judgment motions are resolved under Florida appellate rules.

The Court of Appeal affirmed a trial-court order exonerating a $180,000 bail bond conditioned on payment of extradition costs and later awarding $7,492.40 in extradition expenses to the district attorney. North River (the surety) argued the bond could not be exonerated because the defendant was not physically present when the court acted and that the court lost jurisdiction to order extradition costs. The court held the defendant’s appearance by counsel under Penal Code section 977 satisfied the requirement in section 1305(c)(1) to exonerate the bond, and the court properly ordered extradition costs under section 1306(b).

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for Southern California Permanente Medical Group (SCPMG) in a negligence suit after a bicyclist was struck by SCPMG employee Dr. Brittany Doremus while she was driving to work. The court held SCPMG met its initial burden by submitting uncontradicted deposition evidence that Doremus was on an ordinary morning commute and not performing work when the collision occurred, shifting the burden to the plaintiff, who failed to produce admissible evidence creating a triable issue. The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that occasional work-from-home status converted home into a second worksite on the day of the accident.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Mason Municipal Court's dismissal of Mirkomil Noziljon's small-claims suit against dentist Doktor Hasan seeking a $5,000 refund. After a bench trial before a magistrate, the court found credible testimony and a billing/credit receipt showing a $5,000 refund had been processed to a credit card provided at the office. The magistrate acknowledged a name discrepancy on the receipt but concluded Noziljon failed to meet his burden. The appellate court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing post-trial evidence and that the judgment was not against the weight of the evidence.

The Twelfth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision denying Gregory Myers a court-ordered certificate of title for a 1970 Chevrolet Nova. Myers had sought title after buying property at a sheriff's sale where the car had been stored, but the trial court found he did not acquire the vehicle by operation of law under R.C. 4505.10. The court concluded title remained with the decedent, Elvin Potter, and that disputes over ownership of the decedent's personal property are for the probate court. The appellate court affirmed dismissal of Myers' petition with prejudice.

The Warren County Juvenile Court granted Warren County Children Services (WCCS) permanent custody of nine-year-old S.F., rather than returning her to the legal custody of her 74-year-old paternal grandmother. WCCS sought permanent custody after S.F. wandered away from grandmother’s home and exhibited severe behavioral and mental-health problems requiring specialized treatment. The juvenile court found grandmother medically frail, lacking stamina and knowledge to meet S.F.'s needs, and unable to provide the legally secure, specialized care S.F. requires. The appellate court affirmed, concluding the finding was supported by the weight of the evidence and was in S.F.'s best interest.

The Ohio Court of Appeals (Twelfth District) affirmed the probate court's ruling that the child's biological mother must give consent before the child may be adopted by the maternal grandmother. The probate court had found the mother had justifiable cause for failing to provide financial support during the one-year look-back period prior to the adoption petition, and the appellate court held that finding was supported by competent, credible evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The court emphasized that adoption terminates parental rights and exceptions to consent must be strictly construed, and it concluded the mother reasonably believed her financial help was unnecessary because the petitioners provided fully for the child and never sought parental support.

The Ohio Third District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Ralph J. Gipple’s motions to revise his sentencing entries to increase jail-time credit. Gipple argued that all days he spent confined across three separate cases should be applied to the concurrent prison terms, relying on State v. Fugate. The appellate court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion because Fugate applies only where pretrial confinement was attributable to multiple offenses simultaneously; here, Gipple’s confinement periods were not entirely overlapping and the trial court properly applied jail-time credit only to the offenses for which he was confined. The convictions and concurrent sentences remain affirmed.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment for the defendants in a premises-liability suit. Appellant Irene Wunderle sued after falling stepping into a boutique and suffering serious eye injuries, claiming the threshold had an indistinct step down that was not open and obvious. The court found no genuine dispute of material fact: the step was small but visible, the store was well-lit, nothing obstructed her view, and no unusual attendant circumstances existed to distract her. Because the condition was open and obvious, the owners owed no duty to warn.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Dennis Tilton's filing titled a "Complaint and Intent to File Petition for Post-Conviction Relief". Tilton had been convicted in Willoughby Municipal Court and later filed his postconviction claim in the Lake County Court of Common Pleas. The appeals court held the common pleas court lacked jurisdiction because Ohio law requires R.C. 2953.21 petitions be filed in the sentencing court (the municipal court). Citing Ohio precedent, the court concluded municipal-court misdemeanants must seek relief through other procedures in the sentencing court, so dismissal was proper.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Ashtabula County Common Pleas Court’s sentence of two years of community control for Maurice D. Turner following his guilty pleas to two fifth‑degree felonies (breaking and entering and aggravated possession of drugs). The parties jointly recommended community control with treatment, and the trial court ordered Turner to successfully complete the NEOCAP residential program as a condition. Because the sentence was jointly recommended, authorized by law, and neither Turner nor counsel objected at plea or sentencing, the appellate court held R.C. 2953.08(D)(1) bars review and affirmed.

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the Portage County Common Pleas court's denial of Austin Mehring’s successive petition for post-conviction relief without a hearing. Mehring had pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and misdemeanor assault in 2022, did not appeal, and later filed untimely post-conviction petitions claiming newly discovered exculpatory cellphone video and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held it lacked jurisdiction to consider the successive petition because Mehring failed to meet the statutory exceptions in R.C. 2953.23(A), and his claims were barred by res judicata, so no evidentiary hearing was required.

The Ohio Court of Appeals reviewed Ashley K.M. Kendrick’s challenge to her aggregate 23-month prison sentence following multiple community-control violations and a new felony conviction. The court held that the trial court had provided adequate notice of the possible prison-range at the original community-control sentencing hearings, did not err by imposing reserved/suspended prison terms while imposing community control, and permissibly ordered one new felony sentence to run consecutively to earlier concurrent reserved terms. The appellate court corrected a clerical discrepancy in the judgment entry and modified the record to reflect an aggregate 23-month term, then affirmed as modified.

The Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Lake County Common Pleas Court’s denial of Julio C. Diaz’s postjudgment motion seeking a hearing under R.C. 2947.23(B) to perform community service in lieu of paying $2,260 in court costs. Diaz argued the court should have held a hearing because he had not paid the costs. The appeals court found the record did not show he failed to pay or defaulted under an approved payment schedule, and the clerk’s letter about potential commissary garnishment did not establish a basis for a hearing. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion without a hearing.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Trumbull County Common Pleas judgment ordering the condominium association and unit-owner defendants to specifically perform a 2014 settlement agreement requiring stabilization and restorative work on a shared wall. The trial court had granted plaintiff Owen summary judgment on enforceability after finding no competent evidence that the agreement was mutually rescinded or impossible to perform. The court limited Owen’s liability to her original pro rata share of estimated 2014 costs and denied attorney fees. The appeals court found no error in granting specific performance.

The court affirmed the municipal small-claims judgment for defendant Jenna Nelson after a bench trial. Plaintiff Stephanie Milton sued Nelson for breach of contract and civil damages under Ohio cruelty statutes, alleging her adopted mustang lost significant weight and training while boarded with Nelson. The trial court found insufficient evidence that Nelson failed to provide proper nourishment or training, and the appellate court held that the trial court did not lose its way in weighing testimony and evidence. The court also rejected Milton’s claim that the case should have been moved off the small-claims docket, noting Milton chose that forum and sought only $6,000.

The Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed a 90-day jail sentence plus two years of community-control supervision imposed on Aaron Hoover after he pled guilty to a first-degree misdemeanor domestic-violence offense. The court reviewed whether the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing and concluded the sentence was within statutory limits and not unreasonable. The trial judge considered the presentence report, victim injury, the defendant’s alcohol issues, and the use of a firearm; the appellate court found no affirmative showing the trial court failed to consider required factors.

The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Noble County Common Pleas Court's October 28, 2025 denial of Daniel T. McElfresh’s motions seeking return of $475 and contempt against the sheriff. McElfresh had pleaded guilty to aggravated possession and later claimed money seized in 2021 was never returned. The record and sheriff jail records showed the $475 was placed in McElfresh’s commissary account on March 8, 2021, and the remaining funds were applied to outstanding jail fees. Because the money had been returned and applied to McElfresh’s debt, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief.