Grubbs v. State — affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Jefferey Randolph Grubbs v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Jay, C.J.; Makar, J.; Eisnaugle, J.
Date Decided
September 1, 2026
Docket No.
5D2025-2811
Topics
Criminal Appeals; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Jefferey Randolph Grubbs appealed a matter from the Circuit Court for Marion County, where Circuit Judge Timothy Thomas McCourt presided. The appellate opinion identifies the lower-tribunal case as 2022-CF-003426-A.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal’s opinion does not describe the underlying facts, the ruling under review, the arguments raised on appeal, or the applicable law.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed. Chief Judge Jay and Judges Makar and Eisnaugle concurred in the per curiam disposition.

The court provided no written reasoning or explanation for its decision. The opinion states that it is not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed the matter appealed from the Marion County Circuit Court.
  • The decision was issued per curiam by a three-judge panel.
  • The opinion supplies no facts, legal analysis, or explanation of the issues presented.

Why It Matters

Because the court issued an unexplained per curiam affirmance, the opinion establishes the disposition of this appeal but offers no stated rationale for attorneys to apply in other cases.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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