Andrew Williams v. State of Florida
Docket 5D2025-2403
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
- Habeas Corpus
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 5D2025-2403
Appeal from the denial of a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion in a criminal case (Circuit Court for Lake County).
Summary
The Fifth District Court of Appeal reviewed Andrew Williams's pro se appeal from the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion in Lake County circuit court. The panel issued a brief per curiam decision on May 5, 2026, concluding that the lower court's ruling should be upheld. The opinion contains no extended explanation and simply affirms the circuit court's judgment, with Chief Judge Jay and Judges Edwards and Kilbane concurring.
Issue Decided
- Whether the circuit court erred in denying Andrew Williams's Rule 3.850 postconviction motion
Court's Reasoning
The court issued a per curiam affirmance without an opinion, indicating it found no reversible error in the circuit court's denial of the postconviction motion. Because no written rationale is provided, the affirmance signals that the appellate panel concluded the record and applicable law did not support relief for the appellant.
Parties
- Appellant
- Andrew Williams
- Appellee
- State of Florida
- Judge
- James R. Baxley
- Attorney
- James Uthmeier, Attorney General
- Attorney
- Daniel P. Caldwell, Assistant Attorney General
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-05-05
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider filing post-judgment motions
If the appellant believes grounds exist, he may file a timely and authorized motion for rehearing or move for certification under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331, as noted in the opinion.
- 2
Consult counsel about further relief
The appellant should consult an attorney to evaluate whether to seek further appellate review (e.g., discretionary review by the Florida Supreme Court) or pursue other available postconviction remedies.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of Andrew Williams's postconviction motion.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- Andrew Williams (the appellant) is directly affected; the State of Florida is the appellee and the prevailing party on appeal.
- What happens next?
- A timely and authorized motion for rehearing or certification of a question to the Florida Supreme Court may be filed under the cited appellate rules; absent such a motion, the mandate will issue and the judgment will remain final.
- Did the court explain its reasons?
- No; the court issued a short per curiam affirmance without a written opinion, so no detailed reasoning is provided in the decision.
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. 5D2025-2403
LT Case No. 2018-CF-001405-A
_____________________________
ANDREW WILLIAMS,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________
3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lake County.
James R. Baxley, Judge.
Andrew Williams, Raiford, pro se.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Daniel P.
Caldwell, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for
Appellee.
May 5, 2026
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
JAY, C.J., and EDWARDS 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