Fontil v. State — Fifth District affirmed without a written opinion

Case
Ralph Fontil, Jr. v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Makar; Edwards; Eisnaugle
Date Decided
September 22, 2026
Docket No.
5D2024-3100
Topics
Criminal Appeal, Per Curiam Affirmance, Appellate Procedure
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Ralph Fontil, Jr. appealed a ruling from the Circuit Court for Marion County in lower-court case number 42-2021-CF-4154-A. Circuit Judge Robert W. Hodges issued the ruling under review.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal’s opinion does not describe the underlying facts, the ruling challenged on appeal, or the arguments raised by Fontil and the State.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth District affirmed the circuit court’s ruling. Judges Makar, Edwards, and Eisnaugle concurred in the per curiam disposition.

The court provided no analysis or explanation for its decision. The opinion therefore establishes only that the judgment or order under review was affirmed, without identifying the grounds for affirmance.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed the circuit court’s ruling.
  • The decision was issued per curiam by a three-judge panel consisting of Judges Makar, Edwards, and Eisnaugle.
  • The opinion contains no factual discussion, legal analysis, or explanation of the issues presented.

Why It Matters

The decision leaves the circuit court’s ruling in place but offers no written guidance about the governing law or the panel’s reasoning. Attorneys should not infer from the affirmance that the Fifth District adopted any particular rationale advanced below or on 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Your email address will not be published.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