Thompson v. State of Florida
Docket 1D2025-0701
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
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 1D2025-0701
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County (criminal matter).
Summary
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed Michael Christopher Thompson's appeal from a decision of the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County. The appellate panel issued a per curiam opinion on April 24, 2026, and the court affirmed the lower court's judgment. The opinion is brief, provides no expanded explanation, and notes that the decision is not final until any timely authorized motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331 is resolved.
Issue Decided
- Whether the circuit court's judgment or sentence should be reversed (issue not specified in the per curiam opinion)
Court's Reasoning
The court issued a short per curiam affirmance without stating reasoning in the published entry. The panel affirmed the lower court's decision, indicating they found no reversible error warranting reversal or remand. No specific legal rule or factual analysis is provided in the opinion.
Parties
- Appellant
- Michael Christopher Thompson
- Appellee
- State of Florida
- Judge
- Clifton A. Drake
- Attorney
- Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender
- Attorney
- Lori A. Willner, Assistant Public Defender
- Attorney
- James Uthmeier, Attorney General
Key Dates
- Opinion date
- 2026-04-24
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider filing authorized post-opinion motions
If counsel believes there are grounds, they may file a motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 within the applicable time to seek clarification, rehearing, or certification.
- 2
Assess further appellate options
If timely motions are denied or not filed, counsel should evaluate whether to seek review in the Florida Supreme Court or other relief, considering jurisdictional requirements and deadlines.
- 3
Advise the client about immediate effects
Defense counsel should inform the client about the affirmance and whether any sentencing, custody, or related orders remain in place or require action pending further motions or review.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the appellate court decide?
- The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's judgment in a per curiam opinion issued April 24, 2026.
- Does the opinion explain the court's reasoning?
- No; the entry is a brief per curiam affirmance and does not include the court's detailed reasoning or analysis.
- Is this decision final?
- Not yet; the opinion states it is not final until any timely and authorized motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331 is resolved.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The immediate effect is on appellant Michael Christopher Thompson and the State of Florida; it affirms the circuit court's resolution in that case.
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
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D2025-0701
_____________________________
MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER
THOMPSON,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County.
Clifton A. Drake, Judge.
April 24, 2026
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
ROWE, WINOKUR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Lori A. Willner, Assistant
Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
2