Gary Farmer

The case involved a defendant charged with sexual battery on his niece, who was under 12 at the time of the alleged abuse, and resulted in a conviction after three trials. On appeal, the court reversed for a new trial, concluding that the trial court erred in admitting the victim's pretrial hearsay statements to police. The core reasoning was that the order admitting the statements failed to include the specific findings of reliability and trustworthiness required by Florida Statute § 90.803(23), instead relying only on boilerplate language, which was insufficient under precedent like Hopkins v. State to allow review or ensure compliance with confrontation rights. The objection was preserved, though the court found no error in admitting testimony from other witnesses under the Williams rule.

criminal lawprocedure

In Brown v. State, the defendant was convicted of burglary of a dwelling and possession of burglary tools after police seized him near the scene of an ongoing burglary, returned him for identification by the resident, and found a rigged screwdriver during a search incident to arrest. Brown appealed, arguing that police lacked reasonable suspicion for the investigatory stop and that the evidence should have been suppressed, and he also challenged the proof of his prison releasee reoffender status for sentencing. The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that the stop was justified because police responded in real time, the resident provided a specific description and location of the suspect leaving the scene, and only one person matched that description. The court distinguished prior cases where stops were based on mere presence in the area without such particularized and timely facts. It also found the state's certified records sufficient to establish the release date for sentencing purposes.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a contract between a condominium association and a public insurance adjuster for handling an insurance claim, under which the adjuster would receive 10% of any recovered proceeds. The adjuster sued the association for fees even though no insurance benefits had been recovered, leading to dismissal of the suit for failure to state a claim; the association then sought prevailing-party attorney's fees under a contractual provision stating that the prevailing party in any action shall be entitled to reasonable fees. The trial court denied fees, finding no prevailing party, but the appellate court reversed, concluding that the association prevailed in the dismissed action and that the contract's fee provision must be enforced as a matter of law without judicial discretion when one party loses.

business & regulatoryproperty

In Wright v. State, the defendant was placed on 24 months of probation in February 2007, and five months later received a concurrent 36-month prison sentence on an unrelated charge. After the probation term ended in February 2009, the state filed a violation of probation charge in March 2009 based on a refused drug test. The trial court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and adjudicated him guilty. On appeal, the court reversed and ordered dismissal, reasoning that under Florida statute section 948.04(2) probation ends by operation of law with no further liability, the violation occurred after termination, and the concurrent sentence did not toll the already-commenced probation period.

criminal lawprocedure

A condominium association sued the joint owners of a Florida unit for an injunction to enforce rental rules. The owners, who live separately in Chicago, moved to quash service, challenging both the pleading of long-arm jurisdiction and the validity of service itself. The court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged jurisdiction by pleading ownership of real property in the state under the long-arm statute. It affirmed denial of the motion to quash for one owner because the return showed valid personal service at the address on the summons, but reversed as to the other owner because her affidavit created a factual conflict over whether the address was her usual place of abode, requiring an evidentiary hearing to resolve.

propertyprocedure

The case involved condominium unit owners suing contractors and others for additional damages after flooding from improperly installed sewage lines, following a prior class action settlement reached by the condominium association on behalf of all unit owners. The defendants moved to enforce the settlement agreement against the owners as class members, and after an evidentiary hearing the trial court granted the motion and dismissed the suit. The owners appealed, arguing they were not bound by the agreement. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the valid settlement agreement explicitly bound all class members and that the owners had presented no evidence of having opted out of the class before court approval.

propertyprocedure