What did the appeals court decide?

The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, meaning it found no reversible error in the matters raised on appeal.

Does this decision take effect immediately?

The decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is filed and resolved, so there could be a short delay before it becomes final.

Who is affected by this ruling?

The ruling directly affects the appellant, Carlensky Deneville, and the State of Florida as appellee; it preserves the trial court's judgment.

Can this be appealed further?

Potential further review to the Florida Supreme Court may be available by petition, subject to the Supreme Court's discretionary jurisdiction and applicable deadlines.

Carlensky Deneville v. State of Florida

Docket 4D2025-1097

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

Criminal AppealAffirmed

Filed: Apr 30, 2026 · yesterday
Jurisdiction: Florida
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Type: Opinion
Case type: Criminal Appeal
Disposition: Affirmed
Docket: 4D2025-1097

Appeal from a criminal judgment in the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County (L.T. Case No. 502023CF001239AXXXMB).

Summary

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in the criminal case of Carlensky Deneville. The appeal was taken from a conviction or judgment entered in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam opinion simply stating 'Affirmed' without published reasoning, with three judges concurring. The opinion notes it is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.

Issue Decided

Whether the trial court's judgment or conviction should be reversed on the grounds raised by the defendant on appeal

Court's Reasoning

The opinion is per curiam and contains no substantive explanation; the appellate court affirmed the lower court's judgment. Because the court issued a straight affirmance without an accompanying opinion, no detailed legal analysis or factual application is provided in the decision itself. The concurrence of the three judges indicates the panel collectively found no reversible error sufficient to disturb the trial court's judgment.

Parties

Appellant: Carlensky Deneville
Appellee: State of Florida
Judge: Cymonie S. Rowe
Attorney: Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender
Attorney: Robert Porter, Assistant Public Defender
Attorney: James Uthmeier, Attorney General
Attorney: Joseph Mollica, Assistant Attorney General

Key Dates

Decision date: 2026-04-30

What You Should Do Next

1
Consider filing motion for rehearing
If the appellant believes there are grounds, file a timely motion for rehearing in the Fourth District to preserve issues and potentially delay finality.
2
Evaluate petition for discretionary review
If rehearing is denied and issues are viable for higher review, consult counsel about filing a petition to the Florida Supreme Court within the required time frame.
3
Prepare for mandate and execution
If no rehearing or further review is pursued, take steps to comply with the mandate—such as implementing the sentence or other court orders—after the decision becomes final.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the appeals court decide?: The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, meaning it found no reversible error in the matters raised on appeal.
Does this decision take effect immediately?: The decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is filed and resolved, so there could be a short delay before it becomes final.
Who is affected by this ruling?: The ruling directly affects the appellant, Carlensky Deneville, and the State of Florida as appellee; it preserves the trial court's judgment.
Can this be appealed further?: Potential further review to the Florida Supreme Court may be available by petition, subject to the Supreme Court's discretionary jurisdiction and applicable deadlines.

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

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                              FOURTH DISTRICT

                      CARLENSKY DENEVILLE,
                            Appellant,

                                     v.

                         STATE OF FLORIDA,
                              Appellee.

                           No. 4D2025-1097

                              [April 30, 2026]

  Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm
Beach County; Cymonie S. Rowe, Judge; L.T. Case No.
502023CF001239AXXXMB.

   Daniel Eisinger, Public Defender, and Robert Porter, Assistant Public
Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

   James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Joseph Mollica,
Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

  Affirmed.

KUNTZ, C.J., MAY and GERBER, JJ., concur.

                          *          *           *

    Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.