McCarty v. State — affirmed the judgments without a written explanation

Case
Joshua Troy McCarty v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Second District Court of Appeal
Judge
Northcutt; Villanti; Atkinson
Date Decided
August 14, 2026
Docket No.
2D2025-0222, 2D2025-0223, 2D2025-0224, 2D2025-0226
Topics
Criminal Appeals, Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Joshua Troy McCarty appealed from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County, where Judge Julie L. Sercus presided. The Second District consolidated four appeals numbered 2D2025-0222, 2D2025-0223, 2D2025-0224, and 2D2025-0226.

The opinion does not describe the charges, underlying facts, procedural history, appellate arguments, or relief McCarty sought.

The Court’s Holding

The Second District affirmed in a per curiam opinion. Judges Northcutt, Villanti, and Atkinson concurred.

Because the court provided no reasoning or discussion, the opinion establishes only that the challenged judgments or orders were left in place. It does not identify the legal grounds supporting affirmance.

Key Takeaways

  • The court affirmed the consolidated appeals.
  • The decision contains no factual or legal analysis.
  • The opinion leaves the circuit court’s rulings undisturbed.

Why It Matters

The decision resolves McCarty’s consolidated appeals but offers no explanation that attorneys can apply to other cases. Any assessment of the issues presented or the basis for affirmance would require review of the briefs and lower-court record.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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