Background
Steven Ramel Daniels appealed from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in two underlying criminal cases, numbered F16-17968 and F16-18086. Circuit Judge Ramiro C. Areces entered the orders under review.
The Third District’s opinion does not describe the charges, the procedural history, Daniels’s appellate arguments, or the State’s response. Daniels was represented by the Public Defender’s Office, and the State was represented by the Attorney General’s Office.
The Court’s Holding
In a per curiam decision, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court. The opinion contains no analysis or explanation of the grounds for affirmance.
Because the court issued only an unexplained affirmance, the opinion does not establish which arguments the panel accepted or rejected. It also does not articulate a rule of law beyond leaving the challenged trial-court disposition intact.
Key Takeaways
- The Third District affirmed the circuit court’s disposition in Daniels’s two underlying criminal cases.
- The decision was issued per curiam by a panel consisting of Judges Lindsey, Gordo, and Lobree.
- The opinion provides no facts, legal analysis, or stated basis for the affirmance.
Why It Matters
The decision ends this stage of Daniels’s appeal without a written merits analysis, subject to the disposition of any timely motion for rehearing. Because the panel did not explain its reasoning, the opinion offers little guidance for attorneys or lower courts on the substantive issues raised in the appeal.