Newberry v. Florida — Affirmed on appeal (per curiam)

Case
Matthew Edwin Newberry v. State of Florida
Court
Florida First District Court of Appeal
Judge
OSTERHAUS (Rick Scott, 2013); WINOKUR (Rick Scott, 2015)
Date Decided
June 24, 2026
Docket No.
1D2025-0652
Topics
Criminal Appeal, Appellate Review
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Matthew Edwin Newberry appealed a judgment entered by the County Court for Alachua County (Hon. Susan Miller Jones, presiding). The opinion text provided contains no detailed recitation of the underlying facts, charges, or issues presented on appeal.

The Court’s Holding

The First District Court of Appeal, sitting per curiam, affirmed the lower court’s judgment without issuing a detailed opinion. A per curiam affirmance without substantive opinion typically indicates the appellate court found no reversible error warranting discussion, though the specific grounds for affirmance are not elaborated in this order.

Key Takeaways

  • The lower court judgment stands unchanged.
  • No written opinion on the merits was issued, limiting precedential guidance on the specific issues raised.
  • The judgment is not final pending disposition of any timely motion under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.

Why It Matters

Per curiam affirmances without opinion are routine in appellate practice but provide limited guidance to practitioners. The absence of a detailed opinion means the reasoning underlying the court’s decision is not publicly articulated, which may limit its value as precedent on substantive legal questions.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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