Moises Heras v. Angelica Heras
Docket 3D2025-1633
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Court
- District Court of Appeal of Florida
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Civil
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 3D2025-1633
Appeal from a final judgment granting an injunction for protection against domestic violence in the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County
Summary
The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a final injunction for protection against domestic violence entered by the circuit court. The appellant, proceeding pro se, claimed his lawyer had documents not presented at the hearing, but he failed to provide a trial transcript or statement of the proceedings. Because the appellate record lacked the testimony and evidence necessary to evaluate factual and legal claims, the court relied on binding precedent that an inadequate record requires affirmance and therefore affirmed the lower court's judgment.
Issues Decided
- Whether the appellate court could review the appellant's claim that omitted documents affected the underlying injunction without a trial transcript or statement of the proceedings
- Whether an inadequate record requires affirmance of a judgment that is not facially erroneous
Court's Reasoning
The court explained that without a transcript or an adequate statement of the record, it could not determine what evidence or testimony was presented or what issues were preserved for review. Citing controlling precedent, the court held that an appellate court cannot resolve factual disputes or find legal error when the factual context is missing, so a judgment not plainly erroneous on its face must be affirmed.
Authorities Cited
- Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Burkett v. Burkett155 So. 3d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
- Zarate v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. as Trustee81 So. 3d 556 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
Parties
- Appellant
- Moises Heras
- Appellee
- Angelica Heras
- Judge
- Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts
Key Dates
- Opinion filed
- 2026-04-22
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider filing a motion for rehearing
If the appellant believes there was an error in the opinion, he may timely seek rehearing from the appellate court to point out specific issues or record deficiencies.
- 2
Prepare and lodge an adequate record if available
If a transcript or a statement of the proceedings exists or can be prepared, the appellant should arrange to file it and, if appropriate, move for relief based on the newly filed record.
- 3
Consult an attorney
Because appellate procedure and potential relief are technical, the appellant should consult counsel to evaluate options, ensure deadlines are met, and advise whether further appeal is viable.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court affirmed the domestic violence injunction because the appellant did not provide a transcript or adequate record needed for review.
- Why did the lack of a transcript matter?
- Without a transcript or statement of the proceedings, the appellate court cannot know what evidence or testimony was presented and therefore cannot assess factual or legal errors.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The appellant, who sought to overturn the injunction, is affected because his challenge failed; the appellee's injunction remains in place.
- Can this decision be challenged further?
- The opinion notes it is not final until disposition of a timely motion for rehearing; further appeal could be pursued only if proper appellate steps are taken and an adequate record is made.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed April 22, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
Nos. 3D25-1633
Lower Tribunal No. 24-16919-FC-04
________________
Moises Heras,
Appellant,
vs.
Angelica Heras,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Oscar
Rodriguez-Fonts, Judge.
Moises Heras, in proper person.
No appearance, for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Moises Heras challenges a final judgment of injunction for
protection against domestic violence. He asserts that he provided his lawyer
with documents that were not presented at the hearing. But Appellant Heras
has not provided this Court with a transcript of the proceedings. And so, we
do not know what was testified to or what evidence was presented below.
Therefore, we are constrained to affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett
Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record
of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the
underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is
not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing
the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that
the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal. The trial court
should have been affirmed because the record brought forward by the
appellant is inadequate to demonstrate reversible error.”); Burkett v. Burkett,
155 So. 3d 478, 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (“Without a transcript, we cannot
know what evidence the court heard beyond the documents that were filed
in the record, and we cannot know what issues were preserved for review.”);
Zarate v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co. as Tr., 81 So. 3d 556, 558 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2012) (“Where there is no record of the testimony of witnesses or of
evidentiary rulings, and where a statement of the record has not been
prepared pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(a)(3) or
2
(b)(3), a judgment which is not fundamentally erroneous on its face must be
affirmed.”).
Affirmed.
3