Baker — Second District affirmed without explanation over a dissent

Case
Kenyeh Lamar Baker v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Second District Court of Appeal
Judge
Northcutt; Rothstein-Youakim; Atkinson
Date Decided
September 18, 2026
Docket No.
2D2024-0432
Topics
Appellate Review, Per Curiam Affirmance, Dissent
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Kenyeh Lamar Baker appealed from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County, where Judge Pat Siracusa presided. The opinion does not describe the underlying facts, claims, or ruling being appealed.

Baker was represented on appeal by the Public Defender’s Office, and the State was represented by the Attorney General’s Office.

The Court’s Holding

The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed in a per curiam opinion. The majority supplied no reasoning or other explanation for its decision.

Judges Northcutt and Rothstein-Youakim concurred. Judge Atkinson dissented, citing Eubanks v. State, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D1247, 2026 WL 1740598 (Fla. 4th DCA June 17, 2026), without further elaboration.

Key Takeaways

  • The court affirmed the appeal without a written explanation.
  • The opinion does not identify the precise ruling under review or describe the underlying facts.
  • Judge Atkinson dissented based on Eubanks v. State.

Why It Matters

The decision leaves the circuit court’s unspecified ruling in place but provides no majority analysis for attorneys to apply in other cases. The dissent’s citation to Eubanks identifies the only stated legal reference and may signal the point of disagreement, although the opinion does not explain that connection.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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