text:
    Dominique D. SCOTT, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0379
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    William SHROYER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0077
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 05, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Ulysses Lee WILLIAMS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0248
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Marvin Lee HOUSAND, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0327
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Anthony Paul JOHN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0351
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Gary L. WOODROFFE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Lizabeth Lynn LOTSEY, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0215
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 01, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Stephen BREWSTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.:2D17-5140
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Marcus Lee BLACK, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4430
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mandamus is dismissed.


text:
    Joshua Nelson CURRY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0695
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 27, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Michael S. MILLER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0667
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 21, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Julian Armond SANDERS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0220
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 7, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Zachary Kenneth ALLEN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0584
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Hiral V. PATEL, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Rodolfo CERVANTES, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-2387
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 21, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Irene SMALL, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-3654
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 21, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Emma CASALE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4911
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 21, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jorge I. DIAZ, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Nelly M. GUALE, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4560
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Christina PAYLAN, M.D., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. FLORIDA JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0302
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Darrell HOLLEY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Samella WOODGETT, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0227
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Sandra Epperson RICH, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. John D. RICH, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0320
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Katherine YOUNG, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Sheri GALVEZ, Personally and/or in Her Capacity as Personal Representative of the Estate of Bonnie Lynn Hower, and/or John or Jane Doe, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0143
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    FIRST PROTECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY d/b/a Frontline Insurance, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Sergio L CUTIE, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-1142
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 29, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Scott HUMINSKI, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. TOWN OF GILBERT, AZ, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-1009
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    PETTI HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. U. S. BANK, N A, as Trustee, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0451
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Charles E. TATE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. HANDYMAN HOME REPAIR, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0580
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jose M. MEDERO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4132
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Harry CLARIDY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-2103
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 20, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted. Dismissed.


text:
    Steven T. HUMPHREY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0258
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jamel Lee BELL, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0289
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Paul Kent CLARK, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0346
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    David I. EPPS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0531
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Mark PORTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5003
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Jarmeel Earl BENNETT, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4938
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Obelin JAIMES-AVILES, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0345
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Darrell L. ARLINE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5082
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Charles WILKINS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4486
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Tiffany Ann MARINO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5125
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Larhonda FELDER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Clinton G. TURNER, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0991
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 09, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    GB ENTERPRISES COMMUNICATIONS CORP., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Carlos S. GUERRERO, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-1063
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 09, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Charles WATLINGTON, individually and as Father of Jesse Watlington, Deceased, and Alda Watlington, individually and as Mother of Jesse Watlington, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. NORTHSTAR FUNERAL SERVICES OF FLORIDA, LLC, d/b/a Fort Myers Memorial Gardens Funeral Home and Northstar Cemetery Services of Florida, LLC, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4590
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 09, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    George E. BAKER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0718
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Rufus ANDERSON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4079
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Scott A. HUMINSKI, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. TOWN OF GILBERT, AZ, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0804
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 21, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Garry Lynn BRUGGEMAN, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5002
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 02, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Tremaine Latroy BAILEM, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-3775
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 1, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Kenneth Paul ALFONSO, Sr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE O/B/O Rachel Jeanelle ALFONSO, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0244
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 21, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Leon BRIGHT, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0614
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Robert James BRIM, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0953
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 06, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Steven T. HUMPHREY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4491
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 16, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Autumn Dawn BRETON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, as Trustee, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0540
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Stella Gomez SEITZ, a/k/a Stella, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Partridge et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0688
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 13, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Randal Thomas ROSADO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0138
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Gary L. SEYMOUR, Appellant/petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5120
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Jimmy Lee WHEELER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4914
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 08, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Certiorari is dismissed.


text:
    Dennis O'ROURKE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0322
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 13, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Ron J. CHALMERS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-2806
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 07, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Daniel JONES, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5119
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 01, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted.


text:
    Ayesha HILL, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-5089
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 13, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Blaise COOK, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-3848
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 07, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Kent PONTOON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4319
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mandamus is denied.


text:
    Terry PELHAM, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0290
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Jared L. LAKES, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0159
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 27, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Tecoy Marquis CAMPBELL, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0019
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mandamus is denied.


text:
    Joshua Nicholas HEARNS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-2923
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Orenthel James FORTSON, Appellant Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0205
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 22, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    N.J.B., JR., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. FAMILY CREATIONS, INC., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-1031
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 19, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    George Alexander HILL, Sr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0156
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 13, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Andrea Faith LOPEZ, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4910
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 7, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jason Maurice JOHNSON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D15-1943
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 7, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Marco Antonio PARILLA, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-4466
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 19, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    S. T. Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0380
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 19, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Aaron D. SHARPNACK, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-0356
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 2, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Tamara WORLEY, individually; and as mother and natural guardian of Rockwell Worley, a minor child; as mother and natural guardian of Macryder Worley, a minor child; and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ransom Worley, Deceased, Appellants, v. GALLAGHER & HAGOPIAN, P.L.; Robert Elliott, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Laurence B. Worley, Deceased; G. Logan Elliott, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Merritt H. Duryea, Deceased; Valerie A. Duryea; and Party On, Inc. d/b/a Gecko's Grill & Pub SR. 70, Appellees.
    Case Nos. 2D16-3251 2D16-3702
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed April 25, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Sterling M. HICKS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D17-3940
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    February 28, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mandamus is denied.


text:
    PFS PROPERTIES, LLC, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Kristina M. Wittliff, and Doug W. Kaderly, Appellees.
    Case No. 2D17-437
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed April 25, 2018.
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Randal Thomas ROSADO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0139
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Daniel ESPOSITO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0165
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    March 14, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    N.T.C., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Grady C. JUDD, Sheriff, Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-1523
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 30, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    James LEON, Appellant, v. Erika LEON, Appellee.
    Case No. 2D17-3898
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed April 27, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    IN the INTEREST OF D.L.P., a child.
    D.H.M., Appellant, v. K.L.B. and L.M.B., Appellees.
    Case No. 2D17-4821
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed April 27, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Cheryl SAUNDERS and David Saunders, her husband, Appellants, v. Rafael Christopher HACISKI, M.D., Appellee.
    Case No. 2D17-706
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed April 27, 2018.
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Lisha Thomas STODDARD, as Personal Representative, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 2D18-0455
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    April 30, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Luz RACEDO, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. TOWER HILL PRIME INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1434
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    The STATE of Florida, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Jose Luis PEREZ, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1459
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Luis CORREA, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. RICKENBACKER MARINA, INC., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-0626
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 08, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Kelly Lynn MOSIER, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Ileana Bory DIAZ, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1802
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    The SANTA BARBARA SMOKEHOUSE, INC., etc., et al., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The MACKNIGHT FOOD GROUP, INC., etc., et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1803
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Belkis SOSA, et al., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2234
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Joanne Perez BENDAVID, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Dan BENDAVID, etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2244
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Edwin L. DEMPS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2371
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred.


text:
    Mauricio CORREDOR, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-0951
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    10015 SB, LLC, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1347
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 16, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Adelmo ROSALES, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1153
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Silvia HUETE, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. ELITE VESTORS LLC, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1202
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    FST HOLDINGS 7 LLC, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1460
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Charles E. STALLWORTH, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1741
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Richard BURDETTE, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. DREIA LLC, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1664
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    SEPTEMBER 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    ARER INVESTMENTS, LLC, et al., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. CHATEAU BEACH, LLC, etc., et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2097
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Granted. Dismissed.


text:
    Jonathan SANCHEZ, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Ricardo IV Montilla OSORIO, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2068
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Ron GOLDMAN and Joel Goldman, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. SPACE COAST CREDIT UNION, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2096
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, etc., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. In re: Terry MCLEOD v. Joyce Ann Tarver, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2402
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 16, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jamal Trevor HUNT, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Child Support Program and Crystal Lee Kemp, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2138
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Larry Alphonso JOHNSON, Jr., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Drew JOHNSON, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2198
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Edwin L. DEMPS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2230
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    October 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Kerlin BELLOT, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2239
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    OCTOBER 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    Reynaldo E. RAPALO, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-0308
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    AUGUST 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Richard BURDETTE, Appellant(s)/petitioner(s), v. DREIA LLC, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s).
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1664
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    AUGUST 17, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Denied.


text:
    CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, Appellant, v. Orlando Martinez DE CASTRO, etc., Appellee.
    No. 3D16-2421
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Opinion filed November 29, 2017.
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Baby Zarah Jane BENJAMIN, et al., Appellants, v. HERTZ CAR RENTAL, Appellee.
    No. 3D15-2810
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Opinion filed November 29, 2017.
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Stephen H. ROSEN, and Stephen H. Rosen, P.A., Appellants, v. NATHAN P. DIAMOND, P.A., Appellee.
    No. 3D16-2170
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Opinion filed November 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jeffrey NEIDLINGER, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Michele ADAMS, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D16-2303
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Carlos FIGUEROA, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1877
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 29, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Erik X. ALONSO, LCSW, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-0901
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    The LIVELY STONE CHURCH OF MIAMI, INC., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2247
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    BEAL BANK NEVADA, etc., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. KNIGHTS KEY CORPORATION, etc., et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-1321 3D17-1137
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    David CARPENTER, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2364
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 30, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferring this petition to the Circuit Court in and for Miami-Dade County.


text:
    Yasmany LOPEZ, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Pedro TORRES, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2340
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 29, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Pedro Alberto TORRES, et al., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2429
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Ronald W. DRUCKER, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),
    CASE NO.: 3D17-2297
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    NOVEMBER 20, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    John HACKIMER, Appellant, v. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-331
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [March 22, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    J & H REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, LLC, a limited liability company, v. Ila WEINER n/k/a Ila Lerner, Hilton Wiener, Joseph Ultimo, Trustee, David Rahimi, Trustee and Greenwich Capital, a Nevada corporation, Appellees.
    No. 4D17-572
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [March 22, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Edmund K. DAWES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-3225
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [February 1, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Kenneth L. JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-3045
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 19, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Steven Thor HATTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-3404
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 12, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Keith SLOANE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-3507
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [March 29, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Nicholas CUTRONE, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-0128
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 19, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Michael L. BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-861
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Skyler Cord LINDEEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-3641
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Brice TROGDON, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-4248
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 19, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Paul DANIELS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-51
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Daniel Thomas ARCURI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2114
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Rene Lee SEXTON, Appellant, v. Kim Louise DETORE, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2133
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jeffrey SALOMON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2610
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    S.B., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-482
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Willie HOGAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-641
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Nathan Dexter PAUL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-1105
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Smaranda I. ANGHELACHE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2819
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 19, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Janice Edwards KNECHT, Appellant, v. Michael Carrington KNECHT, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2297
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Salvatore M. DECANIO, Jr., a/k/a Salvatore F. Decanio, Appellant, v. Carol A. DECANIO, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-348
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Wisner LUBERISSE, Appellant, v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, etc., et al., Appellees.
    No. 4D17-0638
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Cory Devon ANDERSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-1498
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 26, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    MORAN FOODS, LLC d/b/a Save-A-Lot, Appellant, v. Latasha WEST, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2036
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 26, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    John M. BARONE, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., a Corporation a/k/a Wells Fargo Home Mortgage a/k/a Wells Fargo Home Lending, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2531
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Ryan Michael HORTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-3139
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 26, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jarvis JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D15-2977
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 26, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Leon WILCOX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-0756
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Henry Frank LENT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Nos. 4D17-2157 4D17-2158
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Peter Halilu OYIBO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-1298
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 26, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Charles SMITH, Appellant, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOAN SERVICING, LP, Terrell Smith, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Incorporated as Nominee for Countrywide Financial Corporation and Saraceno West Community Association, Incorporated, Appellees.
    No. 4D17-2642
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [May 3, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Mary Ellen PORCO, Appellant, v. Michael F. PORCO, 137 West 75th Street, LLC, 123 West 75th Street, LLC, The Porco Family Trust, and The Michael F. and Mary Ellen Porco Trust, Appellees.
    No. 4D17-958
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [May 3, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Shannon M. STONE, Appellant, v. Martin S. STONE, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2700
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [May 3, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Stacy BELLOWS, Appellant, v. Sean BELLOWS, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-537
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [May 9, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Ann CIPRIANI-MAGES and Anthony G. Mages, Appellants, v. THIRD FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF CLEVELAND, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2713
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [May 3, 2018]
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Kristen Ann LUNGARINI, Appellant, v. Frank IRIZARRY, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-2774
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    May 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    William THOMPSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2567
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Issiac SANDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3626
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    George Robert LIGHTKEP, Jr. Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1485
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed March 13, 2018 Rehearing Denied April 13, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Ashley DUNN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2202
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed March 6, 2018 Rehearing Denied April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Jeremiah James NOE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-363
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed February 27, 2018 Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied April 13, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Lionel MILLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3385
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Darryl E. PEARLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D18-507
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Gregory Lee JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D18-370
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Beaver REED Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-4047
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Alien GUILLAUME, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-4021
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Sean ASHMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3925
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Clarence Leontay FRAZIER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3840
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Vinodh RAGHUBIR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3644
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Shemira HARGROVE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3530
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Curtis L. ROSS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3188
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Kevin HIGHLANDER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1872 5D17-2004
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Dillon CALISI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1274
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Angel RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1160
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Gerell George DUNCAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-977
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Jarrod Marqui ROBERTS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D18-378
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Pedro Esteban Cantero BONILLA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-169
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Richard BRACCIA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D16-3804
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Doryaz Dewaz ROTHER, Appellant v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D16-3612
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 3, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Demond L. CORBIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D18-267
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Mitchell Tyrone GEORGE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D18-59
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Antonio L. WELCH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-3977
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Yuraddis Llorente TAMAYO, Appellant, v. Karl Harry MILLER, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2320
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Brandon Lee DAILEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2184
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Walter J. O'CONNOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2075
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    James PRITCHARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1816
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Jose Manuel CRUZ, Appellant, v. Alma KORSHAK, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1755
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Elijah NELSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1660
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    William John FAILING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1605
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Michael JOHNSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1272
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    WILDWOOD VILLAGES, LLC, Quest Industries, LC and Unity Land Management, Appellants, v. Vaughn R. HARRIS, Cheryl M. Harris, Art Spengler, Jerry Neaveill, Connie Neaveill, Terrance Piotrowicz and Suzanne Piotrowicz, Appellees.
    Case No. 5D17-1215
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Ashley Dawn ZURVALEC, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1032
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Robert Riddle CLINTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-873
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Kenneth Roy STEWART, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D15-1900
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed April 10, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Stephen WAMLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2350
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Sandra Pickens NORRIS and Cecil Albert Norris, Appellants/Cross Appellees, v. Hector I. GONZALEZ-HERNANDEZ and Christian Blocker, Appellees/Cross Appellants.
    Case No. 5D16-4354
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed June 5, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Leaundrea Derrico PARKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2301
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Cindy GROSKEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2260
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Alan PATE, Appellant, v. Gary BORDERS, Lake County Sheriff and Warden S. Cumbie, Lake Correctional Institutional, Appellees.
    Case No. 5D17-1938
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Bryant CROSLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1877
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Willie FERGUSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1394
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Dominic Anthony WILKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-1281
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    Chuki P. DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2628
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


text:
    William G. TILME, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Case No. 5D17-2575
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Decision filed January 23, 2018
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   AFFIRMED.


author: Klingensmith, J.

text:
    Taide Wiston ASENCIO, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-1686
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 4, 2018]
    Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Stacey Kime, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Heidi L. Bettendorf, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   Klingensmith, J.

Appellant Taide Asencio appeals his conviction for shooting into an occupied vehicle. He raises three issues on appeal, although only two of them merit discussion. First, whether the trial court erred by admitting a jail call made by appellant while he was in jail awaiting trial. Second, whether the trial court erred by allowing the alternate jurors to enter the jury room at the end of the trial, but before deliberations. We affirm on both of these issues. On the third issue of whether the jury's verdict was inconsistent, we affirm without comment.

Appellant was arrested and charged with three counts of attempted murder with a firearm and one count of shooting into an occupied vehicle. The police investigation revealed he approached the back of a truck stopped outside a convenience store, and shot at the occupants seated inside. At trial, the State sought to admit into evidence the recording of a jail call made by appellant while in custody. To lay the foundation for admitting the call, the State called a detective to testify that she spoke to appellant for approximately thirty minutes, and was familiar with appellant's voice because of his distinctive "southern drawl." However, when asked whose voice she recognized in the recording, she said the name "Sanchez," instead of appellant's name. The prosecutor then abruptly ended direct examination of the detective without attempting to admit the recording into evidence.

Later in the trial, a records custodian in the telecommunications department of the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office was called to testify on behalf of the State. She confirmed that, as the custodian of records, she keeps and maintains the records of jail calls made by inmates at the Palm Beach County Jail and that those records are kept in the ordinary course of business. The records custodian testified that the recordings were recorded and maintained at or near the time the calls were made, and stored on a secure server only accessible with a username and password.

She then explained to the jury how the jail's call system works. Once an inmate picks up the telephone, a recording plays and says the call may be recorded or monitored. The recording asks the inmate to manually enter his or her booking number plus PIN number into the phone's keypad. The system also requires inmates to verify their identity using a system that employs voice recognition software to match the inmate's voice with his or her name as recorded during the booking process. If this three-tiered verification process is successfully completed and the inmate dials the phone number for the outgoing call, the parties may start speaking once the call is accepted.

The records custodian also explained that she created a CD containing over 100 calls made by appellant while he was in jail, and that the CD was an accurate reflection of those calls. The State sought to admit one of the jail calls on the CD into evidence. Defense counsel objected and argued that the call was not properly authenticated. The trial court overruled the objection, and admitted the recording into evidence. It reasoned that the recording of the call was admissible because of the jail call system's verification process and the fact that earlier at trial the detective recognized appellant's voice and identified him as the speaker in the jail call. Neither the prosecutor nor defense counsel informed the trial court that the detective identified the speaker in the recorded jail call as "Sanchez."

The jail call was played for the jury. In the call, one of the speakers admitted to the shooting, and stated, "They got me on camera.... I hit him in the head one time and four in the back. But that mother fucker didn't die."

After the jury was charged at the conclusion of trial, the trial court addressed the alternate jurors, and allowed them to go back into the jury room to say goodbye to the other jurors:

THE COURT: And so it is now incumbent upon me to identify our two alternate jurors and to excuse them with my sincere thanks. You do not know who they are. Our alternate jurors in this case are [Hernandez] and [McCray]. Those are our two alternates. Now, Ms. Hernandez and Ms. McCray, did you leave personal items in the Jury room?
MS. MCCRAY: Yes.
THE COURT: Okay. You can go back-leave your personal set of jury instructions and your personal notes on your chairs. The rest of you can take your personal set of jury instructions and your notes back into the jury room. Say goodbye to Ms. Hernandez and Ms. McCray. And then they will come right back on out and then I will excuse them with my thanks. I want to wish the best of you the best of luck in your deliberations. And Ms. Hernandez and Ms. McCray we will see you right back out here in just a moment. You can go back and get your personal items. Okay? And if you want to exchange numbers with people that you have met you can certainly do that in the back just for a moment. Okay? Great. Come on out.

The jury exited the courtroom, and approximately two minutes later, the alternate jurors came back to the courtroom. The court thanked them for their service and officially discharged them. The jury ultimately acquitted appellant on the three attempted murder counts, but found him guilty of shooting into an occupied vehicle. This appeal followed.

Admissibility of the Jail Call

"The standard of review of a trial court's evidentiary rulings is abuse of discretion." McDuffie v. State , 970 So.2d 312, 326 (Fla. 2007).

"Authentication or identification of evidence is required as a condition precedent to its admissibility. The requirements of this section are satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims." § 90.901, Fla. Stat. (2016). "[T]he authentication should be made by the technician who operated the recording device or a person with knowledge of the conversation that was recorded." Santana v. State , 191 So.3d 946, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). "[T]here is no specific list of requirements for authentication, and each case must be determined on its own merits." Vilsaint v. State , 127 So.3d 647, 650 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). The question for the trial court is not whether the evidence is authentic, but whether evidence exists from which the jury could reasonably conclude that it is authentic.

An audio recording may be authenticated by a witness who has some "prior special familiarity" with the defendant's voice, or by a witness that has "special training in voice recognition." Evans v. State , 177 So.3d 1219, 1230 (Fla. 2015) ; see also Vilsaint , 127 So.3d at 650 (holding that a recording was sufficiently authenticated by a detective who purportedly recognized the defendant's voice on the recording because "the detective spoke to appellant for approximately ten to fifteen minutes prior to appellant being put in the cell").

Alternatively, an audio recording may be authenticated by a records custodian of the jail calls, even if that custodian is not personally familiar with the defendant's voice. In United States v. Harris , 338 Fed.Appx. 892, 894 (11th Cir. 2009), defendant Harris argued that the State failed to properly authenticate a jail call. The Eleventh Circuit disagreed:

Although no witness identified the voice as Harris's, the evidence showed that the recording was associated with Harris's jail identification number, which corresponded with the unique I-PIN number assigned to Harris. Moreover, the speaker identified himself as "Michael," which is Harris's first name. The inmate speaker in the recording also makes reference to the actual facts at the time of the motorcycle accident that were within the Defendant Harris's knowledge, further corroborating that the Defendant is the speaker. As such, the government met its burden of authentication by providing sufficient evidence to make out a prima facie case that the speaker in the recording is Michael Harris.

Id. at 895 ; see also State v. Norah , 131 So.3d 172, 193 (La. Ct. App. 2013) (admitting jail call with telecommunications supervisor of jail on witness stand was proper because "the recordings were directly tied to the defendants by their unique folder numbers").

Here, the trial court did not base its ruling regarding authenticity solely on the assumption that the detective properly identified appellant on the jail call. As in Harris , other sufficient indicia of reliability were present to admit the recording into evidence. 338 Fed.Appx. at 895.

The records custodian thoroughly explained how the system used the inmate's booking number, PIN number, and voice recognition software to identify the individual placing the call. This three-tiered verification process was used to identify appellant as the inmate who made the call that was ultimately admitted into evidence and played for the jury. Additionally, a speaker on the recorded jail call referenced facts of the alleged crime that would be within the perpetrator's knowledge.

When considered together, these facts provided sufficient evidence for the recording's authentication and admittance into evidence. Thus, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the recording over appellant's objection.

Alternate Jurors in the Jury Room

Appellant also argues that the trial court erred by allowing the alternate jurors to briefly enter the jury room just prior to deliberations. We first note that defense counsel's failure to object when the judge allowed the alternate jurors to briefly return to the jury room renders this issue unpreserved for appellate review. See James v. State , 843 So.2d 933, 936 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (holding that because the defendant failed to file a motion for a new trial based on juror misconduct, the alleged error was not preserved for appellate review).

If the trial court was informed when this occurred, remedial options were available to prevent any real or perceived prejudice. If defense counsel made a timely objection, he could have requested that the court conduct an inquiry as to whether any of the jurors had improper contact with the alternate jurors during that time. Defense counsel could have also requested that the court give special instructions to the jurors regarding the presence of the alternate jurors, or requested a mistrial.

Because appellant failed to object or move for a mistrial, this issue is reviewed under the fundamental error standard. "Fundamental error is error that 'goes to the foundation of the case or the merits of the cause of action.' " James v. State , 843 So.2d 933, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (quoting J.B. v. State , 705 So.2d 1376, 1378 (Fla. 1998) ). For the reasons set forth below, we find that the trial court did not commit fundamental error by allowing the alternate jurors to briefly return to the jury room.

Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.280(a) specifically provides that "an alternate juror who does not replace a principal juror shall be discharged at the same time the jury retires to consider its verdict." We have long held that jury deliberations must be impartial, private, and secret. See Berry v. State , 298 So.2d 491, 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). However, Florida courts have made an important distinction between what constitutes jury deliberations as opposed to preliminary organizational decisions . Cases discussing this distinction have generally held that trial courts do not assume prejudice to the defendant whenever an alternate juror briefly enters the jury room at the conclusion of trial.

For example, in Jacksonville Racing Ass'n, Inc. v. Harrison , 530 So.2d 1001, 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), the trial court asked the jury to retire, select a foreperson, and decide whether to begin deliberations that night or the next day. The trial court, however, failed to discharge the alternate juror, who remained present when the jury elected their foreperson. Id. On appeal, the First District affirmed the verdict, holding that "there appears to be no reasonable possibility that the alternate participated in any substantive deliberations, but was present during the foreperson's election and the decision on whether to begin deliberations." Id.

In this case, there is no indication that the jury was, or reasonably could have been, compromised. Even though the alternate jurors were not formally discharged before the jury retired to the jury room, they were not physically present in the jury room during actual deliberations. Therefore, we do not presume that the alternate jurors' brief return to the jury room constituted an external influence that amounted to prejudice. As the First District explained in Morgan v. State , 212 So.3d 1104, 1106 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) :

The jury was instructed that it must follow the law as set out in the instructions. Those instructions included an instruction that the "first thing" the jury should do was to select a foreperson. It is well-established that " '[a]bsent a finding to the contrary, juries are presumed to follow the instructions given them.' " Johnson v. State , 164 So.3d 794, 797 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (quoting Carter v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. , 778 So.2d 932, 942 (Fla. 2000) ).

Id.

Because the jury's first point of business in this case would have been to elect a foreperson, the alternate jurors' presence in the jury room for two minutes certainly occurred before deliberations. Thus, we conclude that the alternate jurors' presence in the jury room was not so egregious as to require a reversal of appellant's conviction. See Jennings v. State , 512 So.2d 169, 174 (Fla. 1987) (holding that no error occurred when the alternate juror was allowed to momentarily retire to the jury room because the record showed that "the alternate juror did not participate in the jury deliberations"); see also Boblitt v. State , 175 So.3d 891, 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) ("Only where the jury is engaged in pre-deliberation organizational activity may the alternate's presence be deemed harmless error."); Bouey v. State , 762 So.2d 537, 540 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (stating that "a distinction should be made between instances where the alternate juror was present while the jury actually deliberated on its verdict and instances where the alternate juror was present only during the limited organizational activity that the jurors typically engage in before actual deliberations begin").

We agree with appellant that, as a general rule, a defendant is entitled to a mistrial if an alternate juror is present for any part of jury deliberations. See Tello-Lugo v. State , 47 So.3d 968, 969 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). There is, however, no substitute for common sense. This rule has no application where the defendant fails to object and the alternate jurors' presence in the jury room is inadvertent and momentary, occurring before the jury has commenced deliberations. We therefore reject appellant's contention that jury deliberations effectively begin at the moment in time when the jury retires from the courtroom, and that any incidental or brief contact between jurors and alternate jurors immediately after leaving the courtroom following the jury charge prejudicially contaminates the entire deliberative process.

In sum, the trial court did not err by allowing the alternate jurors to briefly enter the jury room before the jury effectively began deliberations. Because appellant has not shown that the alternate jurors' authorized presence in the jury room was anything other than (at worst) a brief intrusion, he is not entitled to a new trial.

Affirmed.

Warner and Ciklin, JJ., concur.

      Sanchez was the name of one of the victims in this case.


author: Per Curiam.

text:
    C.J., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-4379
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 18, 2018]
    Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Virginia Murphy, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jessenia J. Concepcion, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

The factors a juvenile court judge can consider in rendering a disposition are challenged in this appeal. In his appeal from an adjudication and commitment to the Department of Juvenile Justice ("DJJ"), the juvenile argues the trial court erred in: (1) permitting a forensic crime lab analyst to testify at the adjudicatory hearing; (2) admitting the analyst's report; and (3) considering the juvenile's subsequent arrests, without adjudication, during the disposition hearing. We affirm on the evidentiary issues, but reverse the disposition and remand the case for a new disposition without consideration of the charges for which there has been no adjudication.

The State charged the juvenile with possession of marijuana under twenty grams, a first degree misdemeanor. The court denied a motion to suppress, and the matter proceeded to an adjudicatory hearing.

When the State sought to introduce testimony from a forensic crime lab analyst, defense counsel objected and requested a Richardson hearing. It argued the State improperly noticed the lab analyst as a BSO Chemist on the witness list, and failed to produce the lab results until the morning of the hearing. As a result, defense counsel asked the court to exclude the lab analyst's testimony and lab report.

The State responded that the BSO chemist was listed as a witness because there is no way of knowing which chemist is actually going to test the substance when discovery is filed. It also claimed the juvenile was not prejudiced because he was on notice he would be receiving lab reports. And, the State could not have provided the report sooner because BSO has a lab policy to not test drugs until shortly before trial.

Defense counsel replied the juvenile was prejudiced because one of his defense theories was that there was no marijuana in the cigarette taken by police. Defense counsel also argued the State's practice of waiting until the last minute to test evidence prejudices all defense attorneys.

The trial court then ruled:

Okay. So, under the circumstances as presented, by definition because of the way this county operates, I don't find that it's a willful act on behalf of the State although I sympathize with how the process works. I don't believe that the extreme sanction of the exclusion of the evidence nor the prohibition of this witness testifying is warranted under the circumstances presented.
If you feel that you need a recess for a few minutes I'll certainly entertain that. But to exclude it or prevent this witness from testifying, that will be denied; nor did I find any willful act-any act that rises to the level of a willful act or an intentional act. Okay. So, noted for the record.

The report was admitted over defense objection. The trial court found the juvenile guilty. The trial court held the disposition hearing the following day.

The DJJ prepared a predisposition report ("PDR"), which recommended commitment to a non-secure residential facility. The PDR revealed the juvenile had two open cases. One involved the burglary of an unoccupied dwelling and grand theft. The other case involved robbery, aggravated assault, and petit theft. The PDR also indicated the juvenile was currently being held in secure detention for a separate incident involving an alleged first degree arson and burglary of a dwelling with over $1,000 in damage. The juvenile was arrested on December 22, 2015, for the burglary charge, on July 2, 2016, in the present case, and subsequently arrested in the robbery case.

Defense counsel argued there was no way to "unring the bell" of negative impressions that arose from the mention of these unfiled cases and the cases in the PDR. Defense counsel argued that without these cases, the juvenile would have been a likely candidate for probation.

The trial court stated it was allowed to consider disposed cases, uncharged crimes, and other matters contained in the PDR. The court then adjudicated the juvenile and committed him to a non-secure residential facility. From the finding of guilt and the disposition, the juvenile now appeals.

We affirm the trial court's decision on the discovery violation without further comment. We write to discuss the trial court's consideration of the juvenile's pending charges in rendering the disposition.

The juvenile argues the trial court improperly took into account the juvenile's arrests without adjudication. The State responds the court was allowed to consider the juvenile's criminal history without limitation in rendering the disposition.

We have de novo review of whether the trial court violated the juvenile's due process rights by considering arrests without conviction during sentencing. Norvil v. State , 191 So.3d 406, 408 (Fla. 2016).

The Florida Supreme Court has set a bright line rule: "a trial court may not consider a subsequent arrest without conviction during sentencing for the primary offense." Id. at 410. We applied Norvil to a juvenile disposition in A.R.M. v. State , 198 So.3d 1132, 1133 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

Here, the State argues Norvil should not apply to juveniles and cites to Barnes v. State , 227 So.3d 216 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). There, the Fifth District held:

Barnes is correct that, under the Criminal Punishment Code, a trial court may not consider a subsequent arrest without conviction during sentencing for the primary offense .... But Barnes's reliance on Norvil is misplaced. Barnes is a juvenile offender and subject to the new statutes enacted for sentencing juveniles convicted as adults. These statutes allow the trial court to consider the juvenile offender's "youth and its attendant characteristics," including the juvenile's immaturity, lack of judgment, and possibility of rehabilitation in determining whether to impose a life sentence. § 921.1401(2), Fla. Stat. (2014).

Id. at 218 (citations omitted).

Here, at the beginning of the disposition hearing, defense counsel requested a postponement to resolve all of the juvenile's cases in a "global resolution." The trial court announced it was going to treat each case separately and individually, stating that if those cases are filed "we can certainly cross that bridge if and when we get to it."

The trial court later asked if either party intended to argue that the PDR was not legally correct. Defense counsel responded it was unfortunate the PDR mentioned two cases that are still pending because those cases have a negative impact on the impression of the juvenile. The juvenile's father then testified it was in his son's best interest to be confined in a facility because his problems had been "building up and getting worse and worse."

The State agreed with the PDR and requested the juvenile be committed to a non-secure residential program. Defense counsel requested a deviation from the PDR, to restore the juvenile to probation.

THE COURT: [Defense counsel], for better or worse, the juvenile court is a creature of the legislature and whether or not I agree with you, the statute allows for the Department to consider not only cases that are disposed of, they're-they can consider uncharged crimes, gang affiliations, and the list kind of goes on within 985.
I don't really see any legal basis under these circumstances to either aggravate or go below the recommended disposition that the [DJJ] has given to us to consider. So, now that everyone has had an opportunity to be heard, the Court at this time is prepared to move forward and will follow the recommended disposition for [the juvenile], which is that he be committed-he'd be adjudicated guilty of the offense; that he be committed to a non-secure residential facility.

The State argues the trial court was referring to section 985.433, Florida Statutes (2016), which provides that the trial court shall consider the DJJ's recommendations when determining whether to commit a juvenile, which may include a PDR. The State claims the court is allowed to view the juvenile's criminal history "without limitation."

Section 985.433(6)(f) provides the trial court may evaluate "[t]he record and previous criminal history of the child, including without limitations" prior adjudications of delinquency, and prior commitments to institutions. The State argues Norvil should not apply because a juvenile does not have the full panoply of procedural rights to which an adult accused of a crime is entitled. P.W.G. v. State , 702 So.2d 488, 490 (Fla. 1997).

But, the Florida Supreme Court has held "a trial court may not consider a subsequent arrest without conviction during sentencing for the primary offense." Norvil , 191 So.3d at 410. And we applied Norvil to juveniles. A.R.M. , 198 So.3d 1132. We are therefore bound to follow our precedent.

We therefore reverse and remand the case for a new disposition without consideration of charges that have not been adjudicated.

Reversed and remanded.

Gerber, C.J., May and Damoorgian, JJ., concur.

May, J.(specially concurring).

I join the majority because we are bound to reverse based on Norvil v. State , 191 So.3d 406 (Fla. 2016), and A.R.M. v. State , 198 So.3d 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). But, I question whether Norvil should be applied to juvenile delinquency dispositions.

The entire statutory scheme for juvenile delinquency is far different than Florida's Criminal Punishment Code, from title to substance. Delinquency has rehabilitation as its goal while the adult system seeks punishment. And, chapter 985 has sufficient safeguards to insure the juvenile's rights are as protected as the need to fashion a disposition to rehabilitate the juvenile.

As the State rightfully suggests, the DJJ is statutorily required to include the child's criminal history within its PDR. § 985.433. In fact, section 985.433(6)(f) 1. requires the court to consider the juvenile's "[p]revious contacts with the department, the former Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, the Department of Children and Families, the Department of Corrections, other law enforcement agencies, and courts. " (Emphasis added).

The reason for that consideration is to curb further delinquent behavior and rehabilitate the juvenile. Here, the trial court did exactly what section 985 requires. It reviewed the totality of the circumstances, including the juvenile's father's testimony, and followed the DJJ's recommendation of commitment. It did not depart from that recommendation.

Were we not bound by Norvil and A.R.M. , I would affirm.


author: May, J.

text:
    DICKINSON WRIGHT, PLLC, a Michigan limited liability company, and Peter Webster, Appellants, v. THIRD REEF HOLDINGS, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, directly and derivatively on behalf BFC-BSI, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Appellee.
    No. 4D17-1842
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [April 18, 2018]
    David P. Ackerman and E. Raul Novoa, Jr., of Akerman LLP, West Palm Beach, for appellants.
    Justin B. Kaplan, Derek R. Young and Matthew S. Sarelson of Kaplan, Young & Moll Parrón, PLLC, Miami, and Daniel M. Samson, B.C.S. of Samson Appellate Law, Miami, for appellee.
   May, J.

A Michigan lawyer and his law firm appeal an order denying their motions to dismiss an amended complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. They argue the trial court erred in failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing before ruling on the motions to dismiss, and in denying their motions.

Because the affidavits filed by both sides created a conflict in the evidence, the trial court was required to conduct an evidentiary hearing. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Jones , 227 So.3d 150, 155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017). Because it failed to do so, we reverse and remand the case for that purpose. In doing so, we do not comment on the sufficiency of either the allegations or the proof to establish personal jurisdiction.

The plaintiffs alleged the Michigan lawyer and his law firm committed tortious acts and participated in a conspiracy to reduce the equity of the plaintiff BFC-BSI, LLC, through a fraudulent recapitalization. A Florida investor, Third Reef, held an interest in BFC-BSI. The details of the recapitalization are unnecessary to our holding so we will not elaborate on the multiple parties and nature of the recapitalization. Suffice it to say, things did not go well, resulting in litigation.

In December 2012, litigation was filed in California, alleging wrongful conduct in the recapitalization. In that litigation, the law firm defended a Michigan resident, who was the Michigan manager of BFC-BSI. That case went to arbitration.

The next year, the same Michigan resident/manager hired the law firm to represent BFC-BSI in an action against other persons and entities involved in the recapitalization. The lawsuit was dismissed for lack of complete diversity and was not refiled.

In the Florida action, the investor Third Reef, sued the Michigan resident/manager, other defendants from the California and Michigan actions, and the lawyer and his firm. The complaint alleged claims for negligence, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting fraud, and conspiracy to commit fraud. The wrongdoing was tied to the recapitalization. The complaint alleged that each defendant had "committed tortious acts in Florida in furtherance of those conspiracies. Consequently, each of the conspiring defendants is subject to the personal jurisdiction of the Florida court pursuant to Florida Statute section 48.193(1)(a)."

The complaint alleged that the Michigan resident/manager and the law firm "actively solicited input and confidential information from BFC-BSI's members," including Third Reef, and that information was used to "protect [the Michigan resident/manager], themselves and their conspirators to the detriment of BFC-BSI and its members."

The lawyer and law firm individually moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of personal jurisdiction. The law firm alleged it had its principal place of business in Detroit, Michigan, and the alleged conduct took place from 2012 through 2015 when the law firm was not registered to do business in Florida. It did not maintain an office in Florida nor a telephone or fax number.

The lawyer's motion denied allegations that he was part of any conspiracy or otherwise subject to personal jurisdiction. He alleged he was a member of the Michigan bar and was never licensed to practice in Florida. He appeared pro hac vice in Florida once through local counsel in unrelated litigation.

The lawyer also attested that he did not provide legal advice to Third Reef, never represented it, had no involvement in the recapitalization agreement, and did not conspire with anyone to deprive Third Reef of its capital investment. His only contact with the other defendants was in this litigation. His role in the Michigan litigation was to represent his clients. There were no issues involving Florida activities in that suit.

Third Reef filed a response, arguing there were sufficient Florida contacts for personal jurisdiction over the lawyer and the law firm. Attached to the response was the BFC-BSI California manager's affidavit. He attested that the lawyer solicited information related to the recapitalization, motivations for key actions, strategy and policy, litigation philosophy, financial capacity, and other subjects relevant to the claims against the Michigan resident/manager. He also attested that he and Third Reef shared this information.

At the first of two hearings on the motions, counsel argued there was no attorney-client relationship to Third Reef, only to the Michigan resident/manager. And, the law firm had no duty to divulge attorney-client communications or confidences from him to Third Reef. Counsel also argued there was no cause of action for conspiracy against a lawyer for simply representing a client, and that any alleged conspiratorial acts occurred before the attorney-client relationship commenced.

Third Reef responded that "the [lawyer was] complicit in expressly affirming lies that are material to the loss, the loss in terms of redemption of BFC-BSI's shares in a company here in Florida."

At the second hearing, Third Reef pointed to allegations in the operative complaint where it was alleged that "[a]t various times described ... the attorneys provided legal services to, and represented or purported to represent the interests of BFC-BSI and the members of BFC-BSI, including Third Reef." It alleged the Michigan resident/manager and lawyers "actively solicited input and confidential information from the members, including Third Reef." These allegations formed the basis of tortious conduct including conspiracy and aiding and abetting. It argued that the Michigan resident/manager and law firm coerced Third Reef and others to sign global releases in furtherance of the conspiracy.

After the two non-evidentiary hearings, the trial court denied the motions to dismiss. The order provides in part:

This Court adopts the holding from NHB Advisors, Inc. v. Czyzyk , 95 So.3d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), and concludes that there is specific jurisdiction over the Law Firm Defendants because the Second Corrected Amended Complaint successfully alleges a cause of action for conspiracy, as this Court explained on the record at the conclusion of the hearing, and because the Law Firm Defendants' affidavits fail to specifically deny that the other alleged co-conspirators committed tortious acts in furtherance of the conspiracy in Florida.

From this order, the lawyer and law firm appeal.

We have de novo review of an order on a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Wendt v. Horowitz , 822 So.2d 1252, 1256-57 (Fla. 2002).

The Florida Supreme Court announced a two-prong test to determine whether personal jurisdiction extends to a non-resident defendant: (1) whether the complaint alleged sufficient facts for application of the Florida long-arm statute; and (2) if so, whether there are sufficient 'minimum contacts' alleged to meet due process requirements. Venetian Salami Co. v. Parthenais , 554 So.2d 499, 502-03 (Fla. 1989).

Where the defendants submit affidavits to prove the absence of jurisdiction, the burden of proof shifts to the plaintiffs to present affidavits or other evidence supporting their jurisdictional allegations. Instrumentacion, Ltda. v. Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp. , 951 So.2d 1001, 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). When the affidavits cannot be harmonized, the trial court must hold a limited evidentiary hearing to determine jurisdiction. Venetian Salami , 554 So.2d at 503.

The lawyer and law firm argue that even if the complaint's allegations were sufficient, they rebutted them by affidavit. The affidavits denied participation in any alleged tortious conduct, which was sufficient to shift the burden of proof back to Third Reef to provide affidavits or other evidence supporting personal jurisdiction. See Cty. of Cumberland, New Jersey v. Kwap , 220 So.3d 1207, 1209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (holding that once a defendant's affidavit refutes the plaintiff's allegations, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to prove jurisdiction); see also Elmex Corp. v. Atl. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n. , 325 So.2d 58, 62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).

Here, the trial court did not recognize that the lawyer and law firm's affidavits shifted the burden back to the plaintiff, Third Reef. It did not conduct an evidentiary hearing on the factual disputes created by the conflicting affidavits. Instead, it listened to legal argument and ruled on conflicting affidavits.

If the parties' evidence cannot be harmonized by the trial court, then "the trial court must hold a limited evidentiary hearing to resolve the jurisdictional issue." Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft , 227 So.3d at 155 (citing Venetian Salami , 554 So.2d at 503 ); see also Packaging & Distribution Res., LLC. v. Duke Realty Ltd ., 194 So.3d 509, 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

We therefore reverse and remand the case to the trial court for a limited evidentiary hearing to resolve the factual dispute so that it can then rule on the jurisdictional issue raised.

Reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing.

Warner and Ciklin, JJ., concur.

      The law firm subsequently registered to do business in Florida in June 2016, almost six months after the initial complaint was filed. None of its five attorneys had anything to do with this case.