Swanson v. State — Fifth District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
David Robert Swanson v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Judge
JAY, C.J. (Ron DeSantis, 2023); EISNAUGLE, J. (Rick Scott, 2017); Soud, J. (Ron DeSantis, 2022)
Date Decided
September 22, 2026
Docket No.
5D2026-0527
Topics
Criminal Law; Rule 3.800; Summary Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

David Robert Swanson appealed from the Circuit Court for Citrus County in a proceeding identified by the Fifth District Court of Appeal as a Rule 3.800 appeal. Circuit Judge Joel D. Fritton presided below.

Swanson represented himself on appeal. The State of Florida made no appearance. The appellate opinion does not describe the underlying sentence, Swanson’s arguments, or the substance of the circuit court’s ruling.

The Court’s Holding

The Fifth District affirmed the circuit court’s ruling in a per curiam decision.

The court provided no reasoning or discussion of the merits. Chief Judge Jay and Judges Eisnaugle and Soud concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The appeal arose under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800.
  • The Fifth District affirmed the circuit court’s ruling without a written explanation.
  • The opinion does not disclose the specific issue presented or the basis for the affirmance.

Why It Matters

The decision leaves the circuit court’s ruling in place but supplies no analysis for attorneys or lower courts to apply in other Rule 3.800 proceedings.

Because the opinion does not identify the underlying ruling or explain the court’s reasoning, no broader substantive holding can fairly be drawn from the affirmance.

✉️ 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Your email address will not be published.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