THESE ARE NOT ALL OF THE CASES RELEASED BY THE COURTS FOR THE WEEK.
To see others not presented here, log in for more comprehensive weekly listings.

Counties -- Animal control -- Dangerous dog -- Ex parte proceedings -- Relief from judgment -- Trial court erred in granting ex parte verified petition to seize dog which bit and wounded a jogger where county failed to make either a particularized or generalized showing that warranted an ex parte proceeding -- Moreover, seizure order did not include any findings that conducting proceedings ex parte was necessary -- Order denying dog owner's rule 1.540(b) motion seeking to vacate order reversed -- Distinction drawn between process for seizure of dog and process for designation of dog as dangerous and the resulting penalties
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Elections -- Initiative petition -- Financial impact statement -- Mootness -- Appeal concerning the financial impact statement associated with proposed citizen initiative amendment to Florida Constitution titled “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion” is dismissed as moot -- Order on review is based on a financial impact statement that is no longer operative, no judicial determination or action remains for circuit court based on complaint before it, and appellate court declines to exercise jurisdiction to decide a moot question
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Personal injury protection -- Coverage -- Deductible -- PIP statute requires insurer to offer PIP deductibles and give named insured opportunity to elect a specific PIP deductible, but is silent as to whether offer is to be made orally or in writing and as to how insured's acceptance or rejection of deductible is to be memorialized -- Trial court erred in concluding that insurer was required to obtain signed deductible form in order to apply deductible -- Insurer provided sufficient evidence to establish that named insured elected a deductible through deposition testimony and affidavit and attached exhibits, which included policy declarations page
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Property -- Replacement cost -- Measure of damages -- Trial court erroneously allowed jury to consider evidence of estimated cost to repair items damaged by covered loss where insureds sold property before making the repairs -- Policy clearly and unambiguously provided that insureds were not entitled to their repair costs unless and until “work is performed and expenses are incurred” -- Conflict certified -- On remand, trial court to confine proof at new trial on damages to only those damages for which recovery is permitted under policy's clear and unambiguous terms
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Marchman Act -- Involuntary commitment -- Circuit court's order requiring respondent to immediately enter substance abuse treatment facility for 30-day period affirmed -- No error in circuit court having sua sponte directed mental health counselor to testify because statutory language plainly requires that one of the qualified professionals who executed involuntary services certificate must testify at Marchman hearing regarding assessment -- Possible conflict noted
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal Law Headnotes (Jump to Civil Law Headnotes)

THESE ARE NOT ALL OF THE CASES RELEASED BY THE COURTS FOR THE WEEK.
To see others not presented here, log in for more comprehensive weekly listings.

Criminal law -- Evidence -- Confession -- Denial of motion to suppress -- Appeals -- Preservation of issue -- Under supreme court's holding in Carr v. State, a party that has already received a definitive ruling on admissibility may have to renew the objection to admitting the evidence at every turn to preserve a claim of error for appeal despite section 90.104(1), which states that when a “court makes a definitive ruling on the record admitting or excluding evidence, either at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection or offer of proof to preserve a claim of error for appeal” -- Where defendant stated through counsel that he had no objection when state moved to admit recorded statement at trial, pretrial objections were abandoned -- Tension between statute and controlling precedent noted
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Lewd or lascivious battery -- Evidence -- Silence of defendant -- Defendant who freely decided to cooperate with detective's investigation, including request for DNA swab, had no basis for arguing that detective's testimony indicating that defendant was hesitant to give a DNA sample amounted to improper comment on defendant's right to remain silent -- Moreover, detective's brief comments about defendant's hesitancy to give a DNA sample were harmless given fact that DNA sample ultimately revealed that semen found inside minor victim of sexual offense was consistent with defendant's DNA
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Misdemeanor domestic violence -- Pretrial release -- Habeas corpus -- Section 907.041(5)(b), Florida Statutes (2024), which provides that “[a] person arrested for a dangerous crime may not be granted nonmonetary pretrial release at a first appearance hearing if the court has determined there is probable cause to believe the person has committed the crime,” infringes upon the exclusive rulemaking authority of the Florida Supreme Court and remains “an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers in Article II, section 3 of the Florida Constitution” -- Mootness -- Habeas petition was not rendered moot when petitioner was released from custody, as issue is likely to recur or is capable of repetition but evading review
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Search and seizure -- Intercepted communications -- Wiretap -- Authorization -- Appeal by state -- Trial court did not err in suppressing evidence against defendant based upon its determination that statewide prosecutor was not a “principal prosecuting attorney of any political subdivision” as that term is used in Federal Wiretap Act and, accordingly, could not authorize the application for wiretap at issue in instant case -- State's argument that statewide prosecutor is the “principal prosecuting attorney of any State” not addressed, as this argument was not made by state any point prior to or during suppression hearing or in its response to defendant's post-hearing legal memorandum -- Although argument was raised by state in motion for rehearing, Rule 3.192 specifically precludes state from raising new argument in such a motion
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sexual battery on child under twelve years of age -- Jury instructions -- Trial court fundamentally erred by instructing jury on law of sexual battery when court used a more expansive definition of sexual battery, enacted after charged offenses were committed, that affected disputed element of penetration -- Trial court instructed jury based on amended statute defining sexual battery as female genital penetration and defining female genital as encompassing all female genital parts; however, because charged offenses were committed prior to enactment of amended statute, jury should have been instructed on law in effect at time of crime, which constrained sexual battery to vaginal penetration -- Error was fundamental because use of incorrect jury instruction with female genital penetration expanded the definition of vagina and reduced state's burden of proof of a contested essential element of crime -- Jury was left to convict based on conduct less than that required by crime of sexual battery at time of defendant's conduct -- New trial required
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Violent sex offenders -- Involuntary commitment under Jimmy Ryce Act -- Release -- Under 394.918(3), both petitioner and respondent may present evidence that court may weigh and consider in determining whether there is probable cause to believe petitioner would not reoffend -- Argument on appeal that a committed person presented “sufficient” evidence cannot, standing alone, demonstrate error -- Trial court did not err in concluding that probable cause did not exist to believe that petitioner had changed so much that it was safe for him to be at large and that he would not engage in acts of sexual violence if released given undisputed evidence that petitioner continued to have the same personality disorder that drove his sexual offenses and that this same disorder caused petitioner to refuse to participate in treatment or develop a safety plan for his release -- Trial court did not err in relying, in part, on relevant portions of expert's report even though report did not express opinion on whether petitioner continued to meet commitment criteria
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Withholding adjudication -- Florida trial courts do not have legal prerogative to withhold adjudication of guilt when defendant pleads to or is found guilty of fleeing or attempting to elude law enforcement under section 316.1935
VIEW OPINION (login required)