Skip to Content

Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of November 5 - 9, 2018

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

No decisions this week.

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

Franklin v. State - juvenile sentencing, Graham
Tisdale v. State - capital case, direct appeal
Spencer v. State - capital case, postconviction relief
IAF v. State - jurisdiction discharged

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Kelley v. State - instructions, unnatural lascivious act
GRABBA-LEAF v. DBPR - tobacco wraps, tax, unadopted rule
Hurst v. State - juvenile sentencing, review
Scott v. State - sentencing, sexual battery
Williams v. State - ineffective assistance, appellate counsel
Burris v. State - prohibition, misbranded drugs
Sims v. Barnard - personal representative, fraud, res judicata
Horton v. Horton - timesharing, equitable distribution, alimony
Williams v. State - burglary, information
Jones v. State - pro se sanctions
Vinson v. Vinson - marital dissolution

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Johnson v. Heartland - arbitration
EU v. DCF - parental rights, termination
Mosaic v. Curd - class certification, negligent pollution
RB v. BT - timesharing
DOR v. Vobroucek - child support
TAK v. State - trespass, stolen car
Pena v. State - second-tier certiorari, judicial disqualification
Rev Rec Gp v. LDRV - temporary injunction, bond, dealership
Hernandez v. State - ineffective assistance, appellate counsel

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Rodriguez v. State - rule 1.540, correcting name on documents
Buade v. Terra Gp - employment, retaliation, administrative exhaustion
Charles v. State - preservation of error, evidentiary objections
Fleming v. State - second-tier certiorari, judge's review of videotape

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

James v. State - sentencing
State v. IJ - mandatory disposition
RN v. State - interference, police dog
Wells Fargo v. Moccia - attorney's fees
Alexis v. State - postconviction relief
London v. Temerian - sanction, findings
Ware v. Citrix Systems - personal jurisdiction; remote employees
DePasquale v. State - postconviction relief
Donahue v. State - sentencing; conflict

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

DCF v. JF - supervision, reunification
Haggan v. State - habeas corpus
LeBlanc v. Acevedo - medical records, disclosure; fiduciary duty, negligence
Related Practices
Appellate & Trial Support
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.


The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.