What did the court decide?

The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment against Matthew Lucas Wade.

Does this opinion explain the court's reasons?

No. The court issued a brief per curiam affirmance without detailed reasoning in the published entry.

Can this decision be further appealed?

A party may seek further review by filing a motion permitted under Florida appellate rules or seek discretionary review with the Florida Supreme Court, subject to applicable deadlines and rules.

Who is affected by this decision?

The appellant, Matthew Lucas Wade, and the State of Florida are directly affected; the underlying criminal conviction stands unless successfully challenged by authorized post-judgment motions or further review.

Matthew Lucas Wade v. State of Florida

Docket 5D2025-2991

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

Criminal AppealAffirmed

Filed: Apr 21, 2026 · 1 week ago
Jurisdiction: Florida
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Type: Opinion
Case type: Criminal Appeal
Disposition: Affirmed
Docket: 5D2025-2991

Direct appeal from a conviction in the Circuit Court for Citrus County, Florida (Case No. 2023-CF-000357-A).

Summary

The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in the criminal case of Matthew Lucas Wade. The appeal arose from a conviction in Citrus County circuit court and was argued by Wade's public defenders against the State. The per curiam opinion contains no published reasoning beyond the court's conclusion to affirm. All three panel judges concurred and the opinion notes that the decision is not final until any timely authorized post-judgment motions are resolved.

Issues Decided

Whether errors were preserved and sufficient to reverse the circuit court's conviction in case number 2023-CF-000357-A.
Whether the trial court committed reversible error affecting the appellant's conviction or sentence.

Court's Reasoning

The court issued a short per curiam disposition affirming the lower court's judgment, indicating that the appellate panel found no reversible error in the trial record warranting reversal. Because the opinion contains no extended analysis, the decision rests on the panel's review of the record and conclusion that the trial court's proceedings and ruling were legally sound. The concurrence of all three judges signals unanimous agreement on that conclusion.

Parties

Appellant: Matthew Lucas Wade
Appellee: State of Florida
Judge: Joel D. Fritton
Attorney: Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender
Attorney: Joseph R. Chloupek, Assistant Public Defender
Attorney: James Uthmeier, Attorney General
Attorney: Alyssa Williams, Assistant Attorney General

Key Dates

Appellate decision date: 2026-04-21

What You Should Do Next

1
Consider filing post-judgment motions
If the appellant believes there are grounds, timely file authorized motions under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 as noted in the opinion.
2
Consult appellate counsel about further review
Discuss with counsel whether to seek rehearing in the district court or discretionary review by the Florida Supreme Court, including assessing likelihood of success and deadlines.
3
Prepare for mandate and enforcement
If no further relief is sought, prepare to comply with the affirmed judgment and any sentence or collateral consequences imposed by the trial court.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment against Matthew Lucas Wade.
Does this opinion explain the court's reasons?: No. The court issued a brief per curiam affirmance without detailed reasoning in the published entry.
Can this decision be further appealed?: A party may seek further review by filing a motion permitted under Florida appellate rules or seek discretionary review with the Florida Supreme Court, subject to applicable deadlines and rules.
Who is affected by this decision?: The appellant, Matthew Lucas Wade, and the State of Florida are directly affected; the underlying criminal conviction stands unless successfully challenged by authorized post-judgment motions or further review.

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. 5D2025-2991
                 L.T. Case No. 2023-CF-000357-A
                  _____________________________

MATTHEW LUCAS WADE,

    Appellant,

    v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

    Appellee.
                 _____________________________


On appeal from the Circuit Court for Citrus County.
Joel D. Fritton, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Joseph R. Chloupek,
Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alyssa
Williams, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for
Appellee.

                         April 21, 2026

PER CURIAM.

    AFFIRMED.

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

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




                       2