Court Filings
1,087 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
Pierre Damond Hall v. the State of Texas
The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment adjudicating Pierre Damond Hall guilty and sentencing him to nine years’ imprisonment after revoking deferred adjudication for methamphetamine possession, but it modified the judgment to delete a $1,550 fine that was included in the written judgment without being orally pronounced at the adjudication hearing. Appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief finding no arguable grounds for appeal but asked the court to remove the unpronounced fine. The Court of Appeals conducted an independent review, found no reversible error affecting liberty, and deleted the unsupported fine while granting counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Criminal AppealAffirmedTexas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)06-25-00131-CRJustin Tremane Simon v. the State of Texas
A Rusk County jury convicted Justin Tremane Simon of aggravated robbery and sentenced him to seventy years’ imprisonment. On appeal Simon argued the evidence was insufficient to prove he was the robber and that the trial court erred by instructing jurors they could consider good-conduct time when assessing punishment. The Court of Appeals upheld the conviction, finding the circumstantial evidence (possession of pharmacy stock bottles, a damp hoodie, a pill on his person, his presence at his mother’s home tied to the victim’s phone pings, and false statements to police) supported a rational verdict. The court also found the jury-charge error regarding good-conduct time did not cause egregious harm given the overall charge, the evidence, counsel’s arguments, and no jury inquiries.
Criminal AppealAffirmedTexas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)06-25-00093-CRJoseph Bebout West, Jr. v. the State of Texas
The Court of Appeals of Texas, Sixth District, affirmed appellant Joseph Bebout West Jr.'s conviction for family-violence assault and one-year sentence. West challenged the denial of his motion for new trial, claiming a juror (the Longview mayor) created bias, and argued the jury charge omitted a consent instruction. The court found West forfeited the juror complaint because defense counsel failed to ask voir dire questions that would have revealed the mayoralty and that no evidence supported a consent instruction. Because the record supports the trial court's rulings, the conviction was affirmed.
Criminal AppealAffirmedTexas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)06-25-00139-CRYoung v. Allen-Johnson, the Estate of Larry Darnell Allen Sr.
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal brought by Yonbloksis Young against Ontarya Allen-Johnson, personal representative of an estate. The court issued a short per curiam decision affirming the lower court's ruling. No opinion explaining the reasons was published in the decision; the judgment of the circuit court for Escambia County is left intact. The decision is final subject to any timely, authorized rehearing motions under Florida appellate rules.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-2902Ramirez v. Dixon
The First District Court of Appeal reviewed Gene Ramirez's appeal from a Leon County circuit court judgment involving the Florida Department of Corrections. The appellate court issued a short per curiam decision on April 27, 2026, affirming the lower court's ruling. No published opinion or extended explanation of reasoning is provided in the document; the judgment simply states AFFIRMED and notes concurrence by the three judges. Procedural rules for timely post-decision motions are referenced but no further substance is given.
Habeas CorpusAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-0484Orama's Delivery Transport Corp v. Department of Transportation
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Orama’s Delivery Transport Corp from an order of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Review Board involving the Florida Department of Transportation. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 27, 2026, affirming the board's order. No extended opinion or reasoning appears in the published entry; the court simply affirmed the lower body's decision and noted concurrence by three judges. The decision is not final until any timely motions under Florida appellate rules are resolved.
AdministrativeAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0339McCray v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Cecil McCray from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Alachua County and, in a per curiam opinion dated April 27, 2026, affirmed the lower court's decision. The opinion is brief: the court issued a unanimous affirmance without published opinion or extended reasoning, and the three-judge panel concurred. The decision notes that it is not final until any timely post-decision motion under Florida appellate rules is resolved.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0492Lee v. State of Florida
The First District Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the trial court's decision in the criminal case of Byron Lee v. State of Florida. The opinion is per curiam and short: the appellate court reviewed the circuit court's ruling and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the judgment. The decision was issued April 27, 2026, and the panel noted concurrence by the chief and two other judges. The opinion is not final until the time for certain post-opinion motions expires under Florida appellate rules.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-2410Lawn v. Graceville Correctional Facility
The First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Charles J. Lawn, Jr. from a decision of the Circuit Court for Jackson County involving Graceville Correctional Facility. The appellate court issued a per curiam opinion on April 27, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's judgment. No substantive opinion or reasoning beyond the one-word disposition was provided in the published entry; the decision was unanimous and counsel for the appellee and the pro se appellant are noted.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-0544Hanna Oaks Operating LLC, Hanna Oaks Center for Independent and Assisted Living v. Agency for Healthcare Administration
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an administrative appeal by Hanna Oaks Operating LLC from a decision of the Agency for Health Care Administration. The court issued a short per curiam opinion affirming the agency's decision. No opinion text explaining the reasoning was published in this disposition; the court simply affirmed the agency's action and noted concurrence by three judges. The decision was entered April 27, 2026, and is subject to any timely authorized motion under Florida appellate rules.
AdministrativeAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0448Enoch v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Naymontie N. Enoch from a decision of the Circuit Court for Alachua County. The appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief and provides no extended reasoning in the published entry; the court noted concurrence by all judges and reminded parties that the decision is not final until the time for authorized post-decision motions has passed.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-05385539 NPR Operating LLC D/B/A New Port Richey Center for Assisted Living & Memory Care v. State of Florida, Agency for Health Care Administration
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an administrative appeal by 5539 NPR Operating LLC (doing business as New Port Richey Center for Assisted Living & Memory Care) from a decision of the Agency for Health Care Administration. The court issued a short per curiam opinion on April 27, 2026, and affirmed the agency's decision. No written opinion explaining the court's reasoning appears in the file beyond the single-word disposition and concurrence by the three judges.
AdministrativeAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0445200 Venice Operating LLC, Venice Center for Independent and Assisted Living v. Agency for Healthcare Administration
The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Agency for Health Care Administration's decision in a dispute with 200 Venice Operating LLC, which operates the Venice Center for Independent and Assisted Living. The appeal challenged an administrative action by the Agency; the appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion on April 27, 2026, concluding the Agency's action should stand. The opinion provided no extended discussion and the three-judge panel concurred, leaving the Agency's ruling intact and the appellant's challenge unsuccessful.
AdministrativeAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0449Torrey D. Walker v. Circuit Judge Sjostrom of the Second Judicial Circuit Court
The First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Torrey D. Walker challenging actions by a Leon County circuit judge. The court issued a short per curiam decision dated April 27, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's ruling. No extended opinion or reasoning appears in the record beyond the single-word disposition and concurrence by three judges. The decision notes the appellate process remains open for any timely, authorized post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-1380Robb v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal considered Blake Robb's appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County. After review, the court issued a brief per curiam decision on April 27, 2026, simply stating the judgment is affirmed. No additional opinion or reasoning was provided in the published entry; the three-judge panel concurred and directed that the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion is resolved under Florida appellate rules.
Criminal AppealAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0542Foziah Alawi v. UPS and Liberty Mutual Insurance
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Foziah Alawi from a decision of the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims concerning a workplace injury claim dated June 7, 2023. The appellate court, in a brief per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower tribunal’s ruling. No extended opinion or new legal analysis is provided in the published entry; the court simply affirmed the underlying decision and noted concurrence by the three-judge panel.
CivilAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-1272P. ex rel. Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management Dist.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of the district’s anti‑SLAPP motion. The Yolo‑Solano Air Quality Management District sued Diamond D General Engineering and Spencer Defty for alleged permitting and air‑quality violations. Diamond and Defty cross‑complained seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging the district relied on a secret internal policy (Policy 24) not adopted through required rulemaking. The appellate court held the cross‑complaint challenged the validity of Policy 24 rather than merely the district’s investigative or enforcement acts, so the claims did not arise from protected petitioning or speech and the anti‑SLAPP motion failed.
CivilAffirmedCalifornia Court of AppealC102574In the Interest of A. A., a Child (Mother)
The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed the juvenile court’s order awarding permanent guardianship of infant A.A. to his paternal grandmother. The Department of Family and Children Services had petitioned for guardianship after dependency proceedings placed the children with the grandparents. The appellate court reviewed the record in the light most favorable to the juvenile court, found sufficient evidence supporting that reunification efforts would be detrimental and that guardianship served the child’s best interests, and rejected the mother’s procedural and legal challenges as either unpreserved, moot, or without merit.
FamilyAffirmedCourt of Appeals of GeorgiaA26A0324Cox Store Management, Inc. v. City of Tucker
The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the superior court and City of Tucker in denying Cox Store Management’s application for a license to operate coin-operated amusement machines (COAMs) at its Idlewood convenience store. The City’s 2022 COAM ordinance bars COAMs within the distance limits that apply to alcohol sales; the store is 80.2 yards from a nearby church. The court held that the enabling statute allows municipalities to impose distance restrictions for COAMs no more restrictive than those for alcohol sales, and that the ordinance’s application to Cox was therefore lawful regardless of the types of alcoholic beverages Cox sells.
CivilAffirmedCourt of Appeals of GeorgiaA26A0652Drake v. UC Health, L.L.C.
The First District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for UC Health, LLC in Danielle Drake’s wrongful-termination suit. Drake, an at-will social worker, was fired after she accessed a patient’s protected health information (PHI) without a legitimate business reason while attempting to report a coworker’s suspected HIPAA violation. The court held that UC had an overriding legitimate business justification—enforcement of its strict policy forbidding unauthorized PHI access—and Drake failed to show that termination was pretextual.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsC-250581State v. Petaway
The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence of Mashhud Petaway for felonious assault following a jury trial. Petaway challenged pretrial identification, admission of firearm photographs from his phone, limitations on cross-examination of the victim about mental health, sufficiency and weight of the evidence, cumulative error, the Reagan Tokes sentencing law, and imposition of firearm specifications. The court upheld the trial court’s rulings, finding the photographic evidence admissible (or harmless if not), the limitation on cross-examination permissible without a proffered nexus to impairments, the evidence sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence, and the sentencing (including firearm specifications) lawful under Ohio precedent.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30424State v. Dillard
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment convicting Daryl Anderson Dillard after he pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, vandalism, and one count of OVI. Dillard argued his trial counsel was ineffective for permitting guilty pleas instead of no-contest pleas because guilty pleas waived his ability to appeal the denial of his suppression motion. The appellate court held Dillard failed to show prejudice or deficient performance: the record did not show the State would have accepted no-contest pleas on the same terms and there is no evidence what advice counsel gave, so any off-the-record claims must be raised in post-conviction proceedings.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30634State v. Crowder
The Montgomery County Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions and sentence of Robert Crowder Jr. after a jury trial. Crowder was convicted of trespass in a habitation, breaking and entering (merged for sentencing), forgery of an elderly person’s deed, tampering with records, and two counts for false representation as an attorney. The court held there was sufficient evidence and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence because J.C. and his electrician came to the house while Crowder remained there. The court also rejected Crowder’s challenge to merger of the forgery and record-tampering counts, finding separate victims (J.C. and the government).
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30560State v. Carmichael
The Court of Appeals affirmed the defendant Precious Carmichael’s convictions following a jury trial for strangulation (fourth-degree felony) and child endangering (first-degree misdemeanor). Carmichael had sought jury instructions on a reasonable parental-discipline defense and moved to exclude certain prior-bad-acts evidence; she also challenged sufficiency/weight of the evidence and alleged ineffective assistance. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in denying the instruction or excluding evidence, concluded the State presented legally sufficient and not-contradicted evidence (including the child’s testimony, bruising and a cord pattern of injury), and rejected the ineffective-assistance claim.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30618State v. Boggs
The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed Chelsey Lynn Boggs’s conviction and sentence for two counts of fentanyl possession after she violated intervention in lieu of conviction. The trial court terminated ILC, found her guilty and imposed three years of community control, including a residential term at the West Central community-based correctional facility. Boggs argued the West Central requirement was unnecessary and that the court erred by not obtaining a professional assessment first. The appellate court held the requirement was authorized, found no statutory mandate requiring a pre-sentence assessment for that residential sanction, and noted the issue may be moot if she already completed the program.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals2025-CA-22Pheasant Ridge Assn., Inc. v. Harper
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court default judgment in favor of Pheasant Ridge Association, Inc. in its foreclosure action against property owner Jeremy Harper for unpaid association assessments. Harper, who was served with the complaint, failed to file an answer or otherwise respond; the Association moved for default judgment and submitted an affidavit of account, its declaration, and its certificate of lien. The appellate court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting default judgment because Harper forfeited defenses by failing to respond and provided no evidence to dispute the Association’s proofs.
CivilAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30661In re P.W.
The Montgomery County Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s decision to grant legal custody of six-year-old P.W. to her father. The child had been adjudicated neglected and dependent after the mother’s arrest and unsafe home conditions; the mother later entered residential drug treatment and had interrupted in-person contact. The father completed assessments and a home study, developed a consistent visitation schedule, and showed stability. The appellate court found the juvenile court reasonably applied Ohio’s best-interest factors and concluded legal custody to father was supported by the preponderance of the evidence.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30671In re C.P.
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s judgments granting permanent custody of three children (C.P., M.R., and C.R.) to the Montgomery County Department of Jobs and Family Services – Children Services Division (MCCS). MCCS had removed the children for neglect and dependency, obtained temporary custody, and later moved for permanent custody. The court found by clear and convincing evidence that reunification with the mother was unlikely in the foreseeable future and that awarding permanent custody to MCCS was in the children’s best interests, given the children’s behavioral needs, the mother’s inconsistent engagement with services and visits, housing and stability concerns, and exposure to a known substance user.
FamilyAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals30705State v. Gore
The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed Dean Dominique Gore’s convictions for engaging in prostitution and possession of criminal tools arising from an undercover online sting. Police posted an ad, Detective Haueter communicated with Gore by text and provided a false rendezvous location; officers observed Gore’s vehicle acting like it was searching for the address, stopped and arrested him, seized his phone, and later obtained his consent to search it. The court held the stop and seizure were supported by reasonable suspicion and probable cause, the phone seizure and subsequent consented search were lawful, and the evidence supported the convictions.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals25 CO 0020State v. Thompson
The Sixth District Court of Appeals affirmed Dennis Thompson Jr.’s conviction for strangulation following a jury trial in Fulton County. Thompson was acquitted of domestic violence but convicted under R.C. 2903.18(B)(3) after the victim and witnesses testified that Thompson gripped the victim’s neck, causing pain, difficulty breathing, and visible bruising. The court held the evidence was legally sufficient and the verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, rejecting defense arguments about inconsistent witness accounts, lack of expert medical proof, and brief contact with the victim’s neck.
Criminal AppealAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsF-25-008