Live courthouse data across 10 states. Pro users get alerted instantly on every filing. Get started
NoticeRegistry
Try Pro

Curtis McNealy v. State of Florida

Docket 5D2025-3924

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

Criminal AppealAffirmed
Filed
Jurisdiction
Florida
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Type
Opinion
Case type
Criminal Appeal
Disposition
Affirmed
Docket
5D2025-3924

Appeal from the denial of a Rule 3.800 motion in a criminal case (circuit court, Duval County).

Summary

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed Curtis McNealy's appeal from the circuit court's ruling on his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 motion. McNealy represented himself; the State did not file an appearance. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision, concluding simply that the lower court's decision was correct and affirming that judgment. No extended opinion, reasoning, or citation of legal authorities was provided in the document beyond the court's one-line disposition.

Issue Decided

  • Whether the circuit court erred in ruling on Curtis McNealy's Rule 3.800 motion.

Court's Reasoning

The published document contains only a brief per curiam affirmance without stated reasoning. The panel concluded the circuit court's decision was correct and affirmed the judgment. No legal analysis or factual explanation is provided in this order.

Parties

Appellant
Curtis McNealy
Appellee
State of Florida
Judge
R. Anthony Salem

Key Dates

Appellate decision date
2026-04-28

What You Should Do Next

  1. 1

    Consider filing a motion for rehearing

    If McNealy believes there are grounds, he should file a timely and authorized rehearing motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 within the applicable deadlines.

  2. 2

    Consult counsel for further options

    McNealy should consult with an attorney to evaluate potential further appeals or collateral relief and to ensure procedural deadlines are met.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?
The appellate court affirmed the lower court's ruling on McNealy's Rule 3.800 motion.
Who is affected by this decision?
Curtis McNealy, the appellant, is directly affected; the State was the appellee but did not appear in this filing.
Does the opinion explain why the court affirmed?
No. The court issued a short per curiam affirmance and did not provide an explanation in this document.
Can this decision be challenged further?
A timely and authorized motion for rehearing under Florida appellate rules may be filed; the decision notes it is not final until such motions are resolved.

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
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                  _____________________________

                      Case No. 5D2025-3924
                 LT Case No. 16-1994-CF-006707-A
                  _____________________________

CURTIS MCNEALY,

    Appellant,

    v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

    Appellee.
                         _____________________________

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
R. Anthony Salem, Judge.

Curtis McNealy, Madison, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

                          April 28, 2026


PER CURIAM.

    AFFIRMED.

EDWARDS, BOATWRIGHT, and KILBANE, JJ., concur.
          _____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
           _____________________________




                       2