McNichols v. State — Fifth District affirms without a written explanation

Case
Michael Shawn McNichols v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Eisnaugle; Harris; Soud
Date Decided
September 17, 2026
Docket No.
5D2025-2047
Topics
Criminal Appeal, Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Michael Shawn McNichols appealed from proceedings in the Circuit Court for Brevard County before Judge Aaron J. Peacock. The appeal involved lower tribunal case numbers 05-2022-CF-28325-A and 05-2023-CF-35275-A.

The Fifth District Court of Appeal’s opinion does not describe the underlying facts, the issues raised on appeal, or the specific matters under review.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth District issued a per curiam decision stating only: “AFFIRMED.” Judges Eisnaugle, Harris, and Soud concurred.

The opinion provides no reasoning and does not identify the particular judgments, orders, or rulings being affirmed.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth District affirmed in a per curiam opinion.
  • The court did not discuss the facts, appellate arguments, or legal analysis.
  • 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.

Why It Matters

The decision resolves McNichols’s appeal at the Fifth District without a written explanation. Because the opinion contains no factual discussion or legal reasoning, it offers no articulated rule or analysis for application 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Your email address will not be published.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