Court Filings

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by A.M., the mother of S.L., from a Hernando County circuit court order in a child-protective proceeding brought by the Department of Children and Families. The appellate court issued a short per curiam opinion on April 16, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's decision. No further reasoning or explanation is included in the opinion; the panel of three judges concurred.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Jessie Lee Shumaker from the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court, in a per curiam decision issued April 16, 2026, affirmed the lower court's judgment without further opinion. The court noted the decision is not final until resolution of any timely post-judgment motions authorized by Florida appellate rules. No detailed reasoning or factual background is provided in the opinion.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Walter Jim Roberson Jr.'s appeal from a Bay County circuit court decision. The court issued a per curiam opinion on April 16, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's ruling. No published opinion or extended reasoning appears in the document; the three-judge panel (Roberts, Ray, and Treadwell) concurred. The decision is subject to timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules before it becomes final.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Vincent Johnson's appeal from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County and issued a per curiam opinion on April 16, 2026. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's ruling without published opinion. All three judges concurred. The appellant represented himself; the State was represented by the Attorney General's office. The opinion notes the decision is not final until any timely post-judgment appellate motions are resolved.

The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in a criminal appeal brought by George Fountain III. The appeal arose from a decision entered in the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court issued a short per curiam opinion announcing its decision to affirm, with three judges concurring, and noted that the decision is not final until the time for certain post-judgment motions has passed. No further reasoning or factual discussion appears in the published entry.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Patrick Fleming's appeal from a Leon County circuit court decision. The appellate court, in a brief per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's judgment. No published opinion or extended reasoning appears in the record; the panel of three judges concurred and noted that the decision is not final until any timely authorized post-judgment motions are resolved. Fleming proceeded pro se on appeal, and the Attorney General represented the State.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Antoine Vonche Booker’s appeal from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court’s judgment. No separate written opinion was issued; the opinion simply states AFFIRMED and notes concurrence by the three judges. The decision is subject to timely motions under Florida appellate rules but otherwise ends the appeal with affirmation of the trial court’s ruling.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Adam Kyle Atkins' appeal from a Santa Rosa County circuit court judgment and, in a unanimous per curiam decision, affirmed the lower court's ruling. The opinion is brief and states only the disposition without providing substantive reasoning in the published entry. The court noted the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion under Florida Appellate Rules 9.330 or 9.331 is resolved.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal reviewed Robert Kleckley's appeal of the circuit court's denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853 motion (a postconviction claim challenging DNA testing). The appellate court, per curiam, affirmed the lower court's order denying the motion without further opinion. The decision leaves the circuit court's ruling in place and notes the appellate mandate is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in favor of appellee Moosa Syhead against appellant Nova Palms Holdings LLC. The appeal arose from a Broward County circuit court case (062022CA009666AXXXCE). The appellate panel issued a brief per curiam decision, stating simply 'Affirmed' without elaboration. Because the opinion offers no substantive explanation, the appellate court left intact the lower court's ruling and allowed any timely motion for rehearing to proceed under normal rules.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's order in a family-law matter between Maschelle Adrianne Pugh (appellant, pro se) and Eric Paul Pugh (appellee). The appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit (Martin County) was reviewed and the appellate panel issued a per curiam decision simply stating 'Affirmed.' No additional reasoning or changes to the lower court's judgment were provided in the published entry. The decision will become final after any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in a dispute between homeowner Mary Burliuk Holt and Lighthouse Bay Condominium Association, Inc. The appeal (No. 4D2025-0869) challenged a ruling from the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County. The appellate panel issued a per curiam opinion simply stating 'Affirmed' without published reasoning, and the three judges concurred. The decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a county court judgment in an appeal by Kevin Flynn and Stacey Dever against French Village Condominium Association, Bryan Taylor, and John Beech. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision, endorsing the lower court's ruling without published opinion and noting the judgment is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved. No additional factual findings or legal reasoning were included in the opinion provided.

The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reviewed a criminal appeal by Juan Camilo Hurtado Castano from a judgment entered in Martin County Circuit Court (case no. 432024CF001321CFAXMX). The court issued a brief per curiam decision affirming the lower court's judgment. No opinion or reasoning is provided in the published entry; the decision simply affirms the trial court's ruling. The mandate is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision in the criminal case of Glenton Sylvester Hicks against the State of Florida. The opinion is per curiam, brief, and provides no extended reasoning in the published text. The panel unanimously affirmed the lower court's disposition and noted the decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

The First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by David Paul Vaughn from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The appellate court, in a per curiam decision dated April 16, 2026, affirmed the lower court's ruling. No written opinion accompanied the disposition beyond the single-word judgment "AFFIRMED," and the three judges concurred. The decision is subject to any timely post-judgment motions under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Michelle Vasquez's appeal from a Santa Rosa County circuit court decision. The three-judge panel issued a per curiam opinion on April 16, 2026, concluding only that the lower court's ruling should be affirmed. No written opinion explaining the court's reasoning is included in the filing; the entry simply records affirmance and notes the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion under Florida appellate rules is resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a criminal appeal brought by Johnnie L. Smith. The opinion is per curiam, brief, and states only the disposition—affirmed—without explanatory reasoning. The appeal arose from a judgment or order entered in the Circuit Court for Escambia County, reviewed by a three-judge panel. No substantive discussion of issues or facts appears in the published entry; the court noted the right to file timely post-opinion motions under Florida appellate rules.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Johnnie L. Smith from a decision of the Circuit Court for Escambia County. The court issued a short per curiam opinion on April 16, 2026, concluding simply: AFFIRMED. No additional reasoning or discussion appears in the published entry; the panel of judges Bilbrey, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas concurred. The opinion notes the case is not final until any authorized timely motions under the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure are resolved.

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the Division of Administrative Hearings in a dispute between Seventy7, LLC and the Florida Department of Revenue. The appeal challenged an administrative ruling, but the appellate court, in a per curiam decision with three judges concurring, concluded the lower administrative decision should stand. The opinion contains only the disposition 'AFFIRMED' without published reasoning in this document.

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Joseph Zieler’s convictions and death sentences for the 1990 murders of R.C. (age 11) and L.S. The convictions rested largely on strong DNA evidence (multiple STR profiles and CODIS hit linking Zieler to the victims’ bedsheet, pillowcase, genital swab, and hairs), autopsy and crime-scene evidence of sexual battery and asphyxiation, and rebuttal of Zieler’s alternative explanations. The Court rejected claims of prosecutorial error under Caldwell, challenges to hair-evidence handling, a sentencing-order drafting issue, facial Eighth Amendment attacks on Florida’s death-penalty scheme, and a unanimity claim, finding no reversible error and sufficient evidence to support guilt and sentence.

The Florida Supreme Court granted the Florida Bar’s petition to amend several Rules Regulating The Florida Bar to replace terminology: “chemical dependency” becomes “substance use disorder” and “psychological problems” becomes “mental health conditions.” The Court also revised a bylaw to allow the Board of Governors to establish programs for enhanced participation by minority members and updated funding restrictions for Bar assistance programs. The amendments are adopted as proposed, will appear in the appendix, and take effect June 15, 2026. One justice dissented, expressing concern about adopting changes tied to external organizations and potential policy consequences.

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh District of Texas affirmed Logan Tyler Blanton’s sentences after he pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child. Blanton argued the trial court abused its discretion by imposing concurrent 30-year terms without adequately considering his intellectual and psychological limitations, low risk of reoffending, and compliance with bond. The court held Blanton failed to preserve these complaints because he did not make timely, specific objections or file a motion for new trial, and noted that the sentences fall within the statutory punishment range.

The Court of Appeals of the Seventh District of Texas affirmed the trial court judgments convicting Jarod Dajon Howell of four counts of possession with intent to deliver various controlled substances. Howell was sentenced to concurrent terms (42 years on two counts, 35 years on two counts). Appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders brief concluding the appeal is frivolous. The court independently reviewed the record, found no non-frivolous issues preserved for appeal, granted counsel’s motion, and affirmed the convictions and sentences.

The court affirmed a default final order terminating or modifying parental rights after Mother obtained substituted service and a default hearing while Father did not appear. Father filed a restricted appeal arguing substituted service and service returns were defective, certain certificates were filed prematurely, and the clerk failed to send notice of judgment. The court concluded Father met the procedural requirements for a restricted appeal, found his briefing on several points inadequate, and determined nothing in the record showed error on its face; therefore the trial court’s default final order was affirmed.

The El Paso Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for PlainsCapital Bank in a trespass-to-try-title dispute. Appellants C.V.P.G. Family Trust and its trustee claimed ownership as successors to heirs of Joaquin Chapa, but PlainsCapital relied on a 2018 final judgment from a previous suit that adjudicated mineral title and declared hundreds of named and unknown Chapa heirs to have no ownership. The court held PlainsCapital met its burden to show a final judgment and that Appellants failed to raise a genuine fact issue that the prior judgment was void for lack of proper service or that C.V.P.G. lacked privity with the prior defendants.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the defendant Lauro Eliud Salinas’s conviction and sentence for third-degree assault by impeding breath or circulation. Salinas appealed only the trial court’s refusal to redact a portion of a 911 call in which the caller said Salinas left the scene with a gun. The court held the statement was relevant contextual evidence explaining why witnesses called 911, was probative of consciousness of guilt and Salinas’s state of mind, and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The court therefore found no abuse of discretion in admitting the recording and affirmed the judgment.

The Stonewater Homeowners Association sued Luther and Laticia Evans for unpaid HOA fees. The parties presented an agreed judgment to the trial court, but at a hearing the Evanses (pro se) disavowed some terms, and the court orally modified the proposed agreement (reducing attorney’s fees, lowering interest, and striking foreclosure language) before signing the judgment. The HOA later filed a motion for new trial complaining the court lacked authority to alter the agreed judgment. The appeals court held the trial court acted within its authority because the modifications were made in open court after the Evanses did not accept the original terms and the HOA did not pursue separate enforcement remedies.

The Fourth Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions of Tyler Andrew Montoya for aggravated sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child. Montoya argued the trial court erred by admitting a video of his police interview without Miranda warnings and by denying his motion for new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held the interview was noncustodial because Montoya came voluntarily, was told he could leave, was not restrained, and the questioning was not the functional equivalent of an arrest. The court also found no reasonable probability counsel’s choices altered the guilty verdict.

The Fourth Court of Appeals affirmed Ricardo Isaac Alonso’s conviction for deadly conduct, a Class A misdemeanor, after a jury found him guilty of the lesser-included offense following a collision while he was fleeing law enforcement. Alonso argued the evidence was insufficient because the complainant’s vehicle, with bright lights, may have caused the crash. The court applied the standard that evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, upheld the jury’s credibility determinations, and found the combined evidence supported a reasonable inference that Alonso recklessly endangered the victim by driving into oncoming traffic while evading officers.