Mondragon v. State — Florida appellate court summarily affirmed

Case
Alejandro Mondragon v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal
Judge
Smith; Mize; Kamoutsas
Date Decided
September 1, 2026
Docket No.
6D2025-3060
Topics
Criminal Appeals; Postconviction Proceedings; Summary Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Alejandro Mondragon appealed from a ruling of the Circuit Court for Highlands County in lower-tribunal case number 1993-CF-000283. Circuit Judge David V. Ward entered the ruling under review.

The appeal proceeded under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). Mondragon represented himself, while the Florida Attorney General’s Office represented the State.

The Court’s Holding

The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s ruling.

The per curiam opinion provided no analysis, factual discussion, or explanation for the affirmance. Judges Smith, Mize, and Kamoutsas concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The Sixth District left the circuit court’s ruling in place.
  • The court resolved the appeal through a one-word per curiam affirmance.
  • Because the opinion offered no reasoning, it did not identify the arguments raised or announce a substantive legal rule.

Why It Matters

The decision ends this stage of Mondragon’s challenge without disturbing the lower court’s ruling. Its practical significance is case-specific because the appellate court did not explain its reasoning or address a broader question of law.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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