Background
Akeem Black appealed a decision from the Circuit Court for Duval County, presided over by Judge London Mahogany Kite. The trial court record is designated as a criminal case (2023-CF-006223-A). Black was represented on appeal by the Public Defender’s Office through Assistant Public Defender Louis A. Rossi, and also appeared pro se. The State of Florida was represented by the Attorney General’s office.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District Court of Appeal issued a per curiam decision affirming the trial court judgment. The appellate court provided no written reasoning, opinion, or factual recitation—only the word “AFFIRMED.” Three judges concurred in the result: Justices Wallis, Harris, and Soud.
This is a “silent affirmance,” meaning the appellate court upheld the lower court’s decision without providing an explanation of its reasoning or addressing the merits of Black’s appellate arguments.
Key Takeaways
- The trial court judgment was affirmed without written analysis or reasoning
- All three appellate judges agreed with the affirmance
- The opinion creates no precedent and provides no guidance on the issues raised
- The decision is not final pending potential motions under Florida Appellate Procedure Rules 9.330 or 9.331
Why It Matters
Silent affirmances, while legally binding on the parties, provide no precedential value and offer no insight into the court’s reasoning. Practitioners and litigants cannot discern which arguments succeeded, which failed, or why—limiting the decision’s utility beyond the immediate parties.
For Black, this affirmance exhausts appellate remedies in the Fifth District unless he pursues discretionary review (e.g., Florida Supreme Court review) or files authorized post-judgment motions. The lack of written reasoning may complicate any efforts to seek further relief.