Copeland v. State — Florida appeals court affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Robert Copeland v. State of Florida
Court
Florida First District Court of Appeal
Judge
Osterhaus, C.J.; M.K. Thomas, J.; Treadwell, J.
Date Decided
August 21, 2026
Docket No.
1D2026-0167
Topics
Criminal Appeals; Per Curiam Affirmance; Pro Se Litigation
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Robert Copeland, proceeding pro se, appealed from a decision of the Circuit Court for Leon County. Circuit Judge Stephen Everett presided over the proceeding below, and the State of Florida was the appellee.

The First District Court of Appeal’s opinion does not describe the underlying charges, the circuit court’s ruling, the issues raised on appeal, or the parties’ arguments.

The Court’s Holding

The First District affirmed the circuit court’s decision in a per curiam opinion. The disposition consists solely of the word “AFFIRMED.”

Because the court supplied no reasoning, the opinion does not announce a legal rule or explain the basis for rejecting Copeland’s appellate arguments. Chief Judge Osterhaus and Judges M.K. Thomas and Treadwell concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The First District affirmed the Leon County Circuit Court’s decision.
  • The court issued a per curiam affirmance without explaining its reasoning.
  • The opinion provides no facts or legal analysis from which to identify the grounds for affirmance.

Why It Matters

The decision leaves the circuit court’s ruling in place but offers no written guidance on the substantive or procedural issues involved. Its significance is therefore limited to the disposition of Copeland’s appeal.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top