Brooks — affirmed denial of a Rule 3.800 motion

Case
Darell Brooks v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal
Judge
MAY (Jeb Bush, 2001); LEVINE (Charlie Crist, 2009)
Date Decided
July 23, 2026
Docket No.
4D2026-1146
Topics
Criminal Law; Sentencing; Rule 3.800; Summary Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Darell Brooks, proceeding without counsel, appealed an order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 motion. The challenged order was entered by the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County.

The Fourth District’s opinion does not describe Brooks’s conviction, sentence, arguments, or the circuit court’s reasons for denying relief. The State was not required to appear in the appeal.

The Court’s Holding

In a per curiam decision, the Fourth District affirmed the order denying Brooks’s Rule 3.800 motion.

The court provided no analysis or explanation for its decision. Judges May, Levine, and Shaw concurred, and the opinion stated that it would not become final until disposition of any timely filed motion for rehearing.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fourth District left the denial of Brooks’s Rule 3.800 motion in place.
  • The decision was a per curiam affirmance without a written explanation.
  • The opinion identifies no specific sentencing issue and establishes no articulated rule for future cases.

Why It Matters

The decision ends Brooks’s appeal at the Fourth District unless further proceedings, including a timely rehearing motion, alter the result. Because the court supplied no reasoning or factual discussion, the opinion offers little guidance beyond its disposition of this particular motion.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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