Florida Appeals Court Decisions: Week of February 8 - 12, 2021

Appellate & Trial Support   |   February 12, 2021
Download Download   
Share Share Page

U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Henderson v. McMurray - free speech, free exercise, pleading
USA v. Chinchilla - order of supervision misuse
Walker v. SSA - disability claim
Aitken v. US Stem Cell Clinic - provisional jurisdiction, anomalous rule
Lee v. Warden - postconviction relief
USA v. Maradiaga - fraudulent document, jury instruction, closing argument
USA v. Isaac - search and seizure, sentencing

Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee

No decisions this week.

First District Court of Appeal - Tallahassee

Ervin v. Smith - appellate attorney's fees, estoppel
DOR v. McMullen - child support
Weatherly v. State - belated appeal
Nain v. State - habeas corpus, pro se while represented
McClusky v. State - evidence, recorded recollection; closing argument
State v. Smith - search and seizure, good faith exception
Thomas v. State - postconviction relief
Roe v. DOH - mandamus, mootness
Trappman v. State - double jeopardy
Rodriguez-Carmona v. State - sentencing
Mobley v. Fussell - mandamus, clemency application, records
Key v. State - inevitable discovery doctrine
Canty v. State - habeas corpus
Howard v. State - sentencing
Thomas v. State - postconviction relief
Wright v. State - sentencing, jurisdiction

Second District Court of Appeal - Lakeland

Kilgore v. State - certified conflict without discussion
CF v. SB - § 61.16 fees
Wells Fargo v. Dias - foreclosure, scope of new trial, standing
Jeror v. State - child pornography, peer-to-peer transmission
DOR v. DEB - certiorari, genetic testing
Lamberson v. State - postconviction relief
Hicks v. Keebler - limitations period, contract claim, certiorari review of PCA
Huckelby v. State - certiorari, Stand Your Ground
Bupivi v. Pollard - certiorari, discovery, physicians' relationships
Hertz v. Sider - certiorari, privileged communications

Third District Court of Appeal - Miami

Acevedo v. RJ Reynolds - products liability, summary judgment
Fla Peninsula Ins v. Nolasco - fundamental error, calling counsel and expert liars
Carollo v. Platinum Adv - legislative immunity, qualified immunity
Armand v. Amisy - marital dissolution, subject matter jurisdiction
Rodriguez v. Carvalho - summary affirmance
Jean v. Bayview Loan Serv - arbitration
Am Towing v. Espinal - class certification, towed vehicles, release
CFLB Mgmt v. Diamond Blue - vacating unappealed fees award
CJ v. DCF - dependency

Fourth District Court of Appeal - West Palm Beach

Eugene v. State - single homicide rule
RJ Reynolds v. Hamilton - hearsay, state of mind
Spielberg v. Progressive - duty to notify
Donald v. State - sentencing
AB v. State - delinquency
Bruce v. State - sentencing
Chiscul v. Hernandez - injunction for protection
Napper v. State - sentencing scoresheet
Cimino v. Am Airlines - mandamus, magistrate
Durand v. State - mandatory minimum, conflict
Larkin v. Grutman - arbitration, settlement

Fifth District Court of Appeal - Daytona Beach

McKinney v. Graham - negligence, bifurcation, intoxication; expert, bias
Posso v. Sierra - paternity, jurisdiction, magistrate
Sweeting v. State - Spencer warning, pro se
State v. Parker - suppression, traffic stop
Mills v. State - Spencer warning, pro se

©2022 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.

Subscribe to Publications


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.