Judicial merit retention
Florida Supreme Court justices and district court of appeal judges are appointed by the governor from nominees submitted by a judicial nominating commission and then face voters in a yes-or-no 'merit retention' question ('Shall Justice/Judge ___ be retained in office?') at the first general election held more than one year after appointment and every six years thereafter. A simple majority of votes cast on the question retains the judge for a new six-year term; a majority 'no' vote creates a vacancy that the governor fills by appointment (Fla. Const. art. V, s. 10).
Enter your Florida street address to see exactly the races and questions on your ballot. The address is sent once to the U.S. Census Bureau's public geocoder and is not stored; your county and district numbers are kept only while this page is open.
Or pick your county and districts manually
County and state legislative districts come from the U.S. Census Bureau's current files. Florida redrew its congressional districts in May 2026 and the Census files predate that map, so the congressional district is marked "confirm" until you check it on the state voter site and enter it manually if needed.
Every Florida ballot asks whether Supreme Court Justice Carlos G. Muñiz should be retained. Voters also answer a retention question for each District Court of Appeal judge standing in their district; which judges appear depends on the county (enter your address above to see yours). Names are verified against The Florida Bar's 2026 merit-retention list and county sample ballots. The Florida Bar discontinued its merit-retention poll in 2023, so there is no 2026 Bar poll.
Florida Supreme Court (every Florida ballot)
Carlos G. Muñiz
Born June 25, 1969, in Chicago. B.A. with high honors, University of Virginia (1991); J.D., Yale Law School (1997), where he was an editor of the Yale Law Journal. Law clerk to U.S. District Judge Thomas A. Flannery (D.C.) and Judge José A. Cabranes (U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit). Deputy general counsel to Gov. Jeb Bush (2001), general counsel of the Department of Financial Services, deputy chief of staff and counsel to House Speaker Marco Rubio, deputy attorney general and chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi (2011-2014), and general counsel of the U.S. Department of Education (2018-2019). Appointed to the Florida Supreme Court Jan. 22, 2019, as its 89th justice and the first Nicaraguan-American justice; retained by voters in 2020; served as the 57th Chief Justice of Florida from July 2022 to June 2026.
Notable:
- Joined the court's 6-1 majority opinion (written by Justice Jamie Grosshans) in Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida v. State (April 1, 2024), holding that the Florida Constitution's privacy clause does not protect abortion and upholding the state's 15-week abortion law (which allowed the six-week law to take effect). An earlier version of this entry said he authored the opinion; sources identify Grosshans as the author.
- Only Florida Supreme Court justice on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot; this is his second retention election (first retained in 2020).Sources: floridabar.org · sparkers-soapbox.com
- Florida Channel produced an 'On the Ballot' profile segment on Justice Muñiz for the 2026 retention election.Sources: thefloridachannel.org
Florida Bar retention poll: The Florida Bar discontinued its merit-retention poll in 2023; no 2026 poll exists.
How his record is described: Observers across the spectrum describe Muñiz as a reliable member of the court's majority: Florida Bulldog, which has been critical of the court, characterizes the DeSantis-era court as 'conservative' and notes its decisions tend to be unanimous or 6-1 with Justice Jorge Labarga as the usual dissenter, while the Florida Phoenix's 2026 voter guide notes that his 2019 appointment was praised by John Stemberger of the Florida Family Policy Council, an anti-abortion group, and points voters to his votes upholding the 15-week abortion law, allowing the 2024 abortion and marijuana amendments onto the ballot, and upholding the congressional map that eliminated a majority-Black North Florida district. The Florida Trib reported in October 2026 that the Miami Herald editorial board urged voters not to retain him while the Sun Sentinel editorial board said he deserves retention. The Florida Bar's last merit-retention polls (2020) found 71% of responding lawyers favored retaining him. As of late October 2026, no organized 'vote no' or 'vote yes' committee, campaign spending, or formal position from Planned Parenthood, the Florida Democratic Party, Florida Rising, or the League of Women Voters on his retention was found in searches; Ballotpedia and news outlets note that no Florida Supreme Court justice has ever lost a retention vote.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida v. State (15-week abortion law) 2024-04-01 · Abortion | The court held that the privacy clause of the Florida Constitution does not protect a right to abortion, receding from its 1989 decision In re T.W. and later cases, and upheld the state's 15-week abortion law. Because the 2023 six-week law was written to take effect 30 days after such a ruling, the decision allowed the six-week law to take effect on May 1, 2024. The majority opinion was written by Justice Jamie Grosshans and joined by Justices Muñiz, Canady, Couriel and Francis; Justice Sasso concurred separately on standing; Justice Labarga dissented. (The earlier claim in this file that Muñiz authored the majority was not supported by sources.) Sources: Florida Supreme Court Overrules Cases Finding That State Co… (2024-04-01) · Florida Supreme Court rules on abortion: there is no right … (2024-04-03) · Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida et al. … (2024-04) · Planned Parenthood v. Florida (VotingForJustice case page l… · Florida Supreme Court upends abortion landscape in the Sout… (2024-04-01) | 6-1 | Joined majority |
| Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re: Limiting Government Interference with Abortion (Amendment 4 ballot placement) 2024-04-01 · Ballot initiatives | The court approved the citizen-initiated abortion-rights amendment (Amendment 4) for the November 2024 ballot, finding that it addressed a single subject and that its ballot summary was not misleading. In November 2024 the measure fell short of the 60% approval needed to pass. Muñiz was in the four-justice majority and wrote a separate opinion saying the initiative was an appropriate matter to put before voters; Justice Grosshans dissented (joined by Justice Sasso) saying the summary 'misleads by omission,' and Justice Sasso wrote a dissent joined by Justices Grosshans and Francis. The author of the majority opinion (reported as the court's opinion) was not identified in available sources. Sources: Florida Supreme Court rules abortion rights will appear on … (2024-04-01) · Florida Supreme Court Clears the Way for the Proposed Abort… (2024-04-01) · Florida voters will consider abortion rights ballot measure… (2024-04-01) · Supreme Court won't let abortion proposal sponsor challenge… (2024-08) | 4-3 | Concurring opinion |
| Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re: Adult Personal Use of Marijuana (Amendment 3 ballot placement) 2024-04-01 · Ballot initiatives | The court approved the recreational-marijuana initiative (Amendment 3) for the November 2024 ballot, rejecting Attorney General Ashley Moody's arguments that the summary was misleading and covered more than one subject. The measure received about 56% of the vote in November 2024 and failed to reach the 60% threshold. The majority opinion was written by Justice Jamie Grosshans; Muñiz joined it and wrote a separate concurrence saying the court should in the future require initiative sponsors to pay closer attention to whether a proposal complies with the U.S. Constitution. | 5-2 | Concurring opinion |
| Floridians Protecting Freedom v. Financial Impact Estimating Conference (Amendment 4 financial impact statement) 2024-08 · Ballot initiatives | The court rejected the Amendment 4 sponsor's challenge to the revised financial impact statement that appeared with the abortion amendment on the November 2024 ballot, leaving the state-written statement in place. Justices Canady, Couriel, Grosshans and Sasso joined Muñiz's opinion; Justice Francis concurred; Justice Labarga dissented. | 6-1 | Author of majority opinion |
| State v. Poole 2020-01-23 · Death penalty | The court receded in part from its 2016 Hurst v. State decision, holding that the Florida and U.S. constitutions do not require a unanimous jury recommendation before a judge may impose a death sentence; it reinstated a death sentence that an 11-1 jury had recommended. The ruling did not itself change the 2017 statute that then required a unanimous recommendation. The opinion was unsigned (per curiam); the court had five sitting members at the time. Justice Labarga dissented, writing that the decision returned Florida to 'absolute outlier' status among death-penalty states. | 4-1 | Joined majority |
| Advisory Opinion to the Governor re: Implementation of Amendment 4, the Voting Restoration Amendment 2020-01-16 · Voting rights | In a non-binding advisory opinion requested by Gov. DeSantis, the court concluded that the phrase 'all terms of sentence' in the 2018 felon-voting amendment includes legal financial obligations such as fines, fees and restitution, so a person with a felony conviction must pay those before regaining the right to vote. The court had five members at the time. Justice Labarga agreed with the result in part but wrote separately, objecting to the majority's strictly textual approach and a point about informing voters. | Majority of Canady, Polston, Lawson and Muñiz; Labarga wrote separately (reported as 4-1 by Florida Politics, as unanimous on the core holding by Florida Phoenix) | Joined majority |
| In re Amendments to the Florida Evidence Code (adoption of the Daubert standard) 2019-05-23 · Courts & procedure | Using its rulemaking power, the court adopted the Legislature's 2013 'Daubert' amendments governing when expert testimony is admissible, replacing the older 'Frye' general-acceptance test and reversing the court's own 2017 and 2018 decisions that had kept Frye. The change affects how judges screen expert witnesses in civil and criminal trials. The decision was per curiam; Muñiz also joined Justice Lawson's concurrence responding to Justice Luck's procedural dissent. Justices Labarga and Luck dissented separately. Sources: Supreme Court replaces Frye with Daubert in evidence rules … (2019-05) · In re Amendments to the Florida Evidence Code, No. SC19-107… (2019-05-23) · In Reversal of Prior Opinion, Florida Supreme Court Adopts … (2019-05) · Florida Supreme Court Says Goodbye to Frye and Doubles Back… (2019-06-07) | 5-2 | Joined majority |
| Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re: Prohibits Possession of Defined Assault Weapons (assault-weapons ban initiative) 2020-06-04 · Guns | The court removed a proposed constitutional amendment banning 'assault weapons' from consideration for the ballot, finding the ballot summary misleading because it told voters existing weapons would be exempted and registered when the text exempted only the current owner's possession. The court reviewed only the ballot wording, not the merits of a ban; sponsors would have had to restart the petition process. Chief Justice Canady and Justices Polston, Lawson and Muñiz formed the majority; Justice Labarga dissented. | 4-1 | Joined majority |
| Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Institute v. Byrd (2022 congressional map) 2025-07-17 · Redistricting | The court upheld the 2022 congressional map that dismantled a North Florida district in which Black voters had been able to elect their candidate of choice. It held that the challengers had not shown a district could be drawn that satisfied the state constitution's 'non-diminishment' rule without race predominating in violation of the federal Equal Protection Clause, and that lawmakers' federal obligation took precedence. Justice Labarga dissented, writing that the decision left in place a plan that is unconstitutional under the Florida Constitution and should have been returned to the trial court. | 5-1 (Justice Canady recused) | Author of majority opinion |
| Equal Ground Education Fund v. State (request to block the 2026 congressional map) 2026-06-10 · Redistricting | The court declined to take up a request by Equal Ground Education Fund to intervene in, or use its 'all writs' power to bypass, a pending First District Court of Appeal case over a trial court's refusal to block the Legislature's 2026 congressional map, saying it lacked jurisdiction at that stage. The practical effect was that the new map governed the 2026 congressional elections. Justice Labarga was the lone dissenter, arguing the constitution anticipates expedited review of urgent statewide matters. The opinion's author was not identified in available reports (one outlet attributes a quoted statement to Justice Adam Tanenbaum); Muñiz's membership in the majority is inferred from the 6-1 vote with Labarga as the only dissenter. Sources: Florida Supreme Court won't intervene in challenge to new c… (2026-06-10) · Florida Supreme Court refuses to intervene in congressional… (2026-06-10) · Florida Supreme Court keeps new congressional districts in … (2026-06-11) · Florida Supreme Court leaves in place new GOP-boosting US H… (2026-06-11) | 6-1 | Joined majority |
| Thompson v. DeSantis (appointment of Justice Renatha Francis) 2020-08-27 · Courts & procedure | The court held that Gov. DeSantis exceeded his authority when he appointed Renatha Francis to the Supreme Court because she had not yet been a Florida Bar member for the 10 years the constitution requires, but it denied the petitioner's request to force a new appointment from a fresh list of nominees, so the appointment was not undone by the ruling. Justices Labarga and Polston each wrote separate concurrences. | 5-0 (Justice Couriel recused) | Author of majority opinion |
| Prentice v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (Engle-progeny smoker lawsuits) 2022-03-17 · Other | The court held that smokers (or their survivors) suing tobacco companies for fraudulent concealment or conspiracy in 'Engle progeny' cases must prove they relied on specific statements or omissions by the companies, rather than letting juries infer reliance generally. The ruling made it harder for plaintiffs in the thousands of remaining Florida tobacco cases to win fraud claims. Justice Labarga dissented, writing that settled Florida law had allowed juries to infer reliance. Muñiz's authorship is reported by Florida Bulldog; the Justia docket (SC20-943) carries the opinion. Sources: Prentice v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. SC20-943 (Justia) (2022-03-17) · Tobacco Industry Gets Win at Supreme Court (Daily Business … (2022-03-18) · Ruling dooms Florida tobacco lawsuits, Supreme Court justic… (2022-03) · Politics and Florida's Supreme Court: the remarkable rise o… (2022-04) | 6-1 | Author of majority opinion |
| City of Tallahassee v. Florida Police Benevolent Association (Marsy's Law and police officers' names) 2023-11-30 · Other | The court held that Marsy's Law, the 2018 crime-victims' rights amendment, does not give any victim, including a police officer who used force, a right to keep his or her name out of public records. The decision reversed a First DCA ruling and allowed the City of Tallahassee to release the names of two officers involved in 2020 shootings. The opinion was written by Justice John Couriel; the decision was unanimous among participating justices. | 6-0 (Justice Sasso did not participate) | Joined majority |
| In re Amendments to Rules Regulating The Florida Bar (continuing-legal-education diversity policy) 2021-04 · Courts & procedure | Acting on its own motion, the court amended Bar rules so that Florida lawyers cannot receive continuing-legal-education credit for programs that require panels to meet diversity quotas, a response to a policy adopted by the Bar's Business Law Section modeled on an American Bar Association guideline. After taking comments, the court reaffirmed the rule with minor changes, effective Jan. 1, 2022. Justice Labarga was the lone dissenter in both the initial and revised orders; Muñiz's membership in the majority is inferred from the 6-1 vote. Florida Bulldog later reported that in 2024 the court also removed 'bias elimination' from required CLE topics, again over a Labarga dissent. | 6-1 | Joined majority |
| Judicial nominating commission residency case 2022-12 · Courts & procedure | The court rejected challenges to a judicial nominating commission's nomination of a candidate who did not live in the judicial circuit at the time of nomination, holding that an appointee must meet constitutional eligibility (including residency) at the time of appointment rather than at nomination. Reported by the Daily Business Review; the vote split was not stated in the search snippet. | Not reported in the available source | Author of majority opinion |
| Smart & Safe Florida v. Secretary of State (2026 recreational-marijuana initiative signatures) 2026-03 · Ballot initiatives | The court declined to hear the sponsor's petition challenging the state's invalidation of roughly 70,600 petition signatures under 2025 initiative-law changes, leaving in place a First DCA ruling and effectively ending the effort to place recreational marijuana on the 2026 ballot. The Department of State had already announced in February 2026 that none of the 22 active citizen initiatives qualified. Individual justices' votes on the order were not reported in available sources. | Not reported (order declining review) | Not reported |
District Courts of Appeal
Which appellate judges appear on your ballot depends on your county. Enter your address above to see yours, or expand a district below.
First District Court of Appeal (Tallahassee)
First District Court of Appeal (Tallahassee)
Joseph Lewis, Jr.
Joseph Lewis Jr. was born in Tallahassee in 1953 and earned degrees from the University of Montana (1974) and Florida State University College of Law (1977). He began his career as a judicial research aide, worked as an assistant public defender, and spent most of 1981 to 1995 in the Florida Attorney General's office, where he became a bureau chief. Gov. Jeb Bush announced his appointment to the First District Court of Appeal on Nov. 17, 2000, to fill the seat of retiring Judge Arthur Lawrence; he took office on Jan. 2, 2001, becoming the second African-American judge to serve on the court. He served as the court's chief judge from July 2013 to July 2015. Ballotpedia reports he won a merit-retention election on Nov. 3, 2020, and his current term ends Jan. 5, 2027.
How his record is described: Only two signed opinions by Judge Lewis could be tied to him through search results; most recent First DCA decisions naming him are unsigned per curiam affirmances on which he sat with other judges (for example, Mency v. State, Jan. 30, 2026, and McCray v. State, March 26, 2026, per the Counsel Stack and FLexlaw case aggregators). Florida Phoenix reported that Judge Lewis was among three judges recused from the court's December 2023 en banc decision in the North Florida congressional redistricting case (Black Voters Matter v. Byrd), so he took no part in that ruling. Note that several search results about dissents by a 'Justice Lewis' concern former Florida Supreme Court Justice R. Fred Lewis, not this judge. In past Florida Bar member polls (years not stated in the snippets), 81 percent and 84 percent of responding lawyers favored retaining him; no 2026 poll figure was found. No organized campaign for or against his retention was found in search results. The Florida Bar notes that no Florida appellate jurist has ever failed a merit-retention vote.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Florida Carry v. University of Florida (guns in campus housing) 2015-10 · Guns / state firearms preemption | The panel upheld the University of Florida's policy barring firearms in student housing, rejecting a challenge by the gun-rights group Florida Carry. The opinion said reaching the group's result would require a strained reading of the statutes and noted that the Legislature may one day choose to amend the law to permit firearms in university housing; it also found the group lacked sufficient standing to appeal. | 3-0 on the outcome (per news reports, Judges Makar and Osterhaus agreed with the result) | Author of majority opinion |
| Levey v. Detzner (candidate qualifying fee) 2014 · Elections / ballot access | In a 2-1 decision, the court held that state law clearly requires a candidate's qualifying fee to be paid before the qualifying period ends, and that if a qualifying check is returned for any reason the candidate must pay by cashier's check before the period closes. Then-Chief Judge Lewis wrote the majority opinion. Source is a third-party case summary (Studicata); the dissent's reasoning was not available in search results. | 2-1 | Author of majority opinion |
Rachel Nordby
Rachel Nordby earned a bachelor's degree in classical studies from the University of Florida and a J.D. from Florida State University College of Law, where she was editor-in-chief of the law review. She clerked for Judge Bradford L. Thomas on the First District Court of Appeal, served as senior deputy solicitor general under Attorney General Pam Bondi, and was a partner and vice-chair of the appellate practice group in the Tallahassee office of Shutts & Bowen LLP. Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed her to the First DCA on Oct. 16, 2019, and she took office on Oct. 23, 2019. Ballotpedia reports she won a merit-retention election on Nov. 3, 2020, with 66.9 percent of the vote; her current term ends Jan. 5, 2027. She chaired the Florida Supreme Court's Workgroup on Vexatious Litigation, created by Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz, and presented its findings to a state Senate committee.
How his record is described: Search results tied Judge Nordby to one signed opinion (the 2025 migrant-flight public-records case) and one panel decision she joined (the 2023 parental-consent appeal). Florida Phoenix reported that she was one of three judges recused from the court's December 2023 en banc decision upholding the DeSantis-drawn North Florida congressional map (Black Voters Matter v. Byrd), so she took no part in that ruling. Case aggregators (Hall Approved, FLexlaw) list her as a concurring judge on many unsigned per curiam affirmances in 2024-2026 (for example, Edwards v. State, July 31, 2026, and West v. West, March 6, 2026). A Florida Bar member poll from an earlier cycle reported 71 percent of responding lawyers favored her retention; no 2026 poll figure was found. The Federalist Society lists her among its speakers and contributors. No organized campaign for or against her retention was found in search results.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Florida Center for Government Accountability v. Executive Office of the Governor (migrant-flight public records) 2025-02 · Public records | A three-judge panel overturned a trial-court ruling and sided with Gov. DeSantis's office in a public-records dispute over communications about the 2022 migrant flights to Martha's Vineyard. Writing for the panel, Judge Nordby concluded the governor's office did not unlawfully delay releasing the records, reasoning that its response time was reasonable given the size and scope of the request and a hurricane emergency that coincided with it. Judges Brad Thomas and Thomas Winokur joined the opinion. | 3-0 | Author of majority opinion |
| Parental-consent abortion appeal from Calhoun County (minor's judicial waiver) 2023-12 · Abortion / parental consent | A unanimous three-judge panel upheld a Calhoun County circuit judge's ruling that denied a minor's request to obtain an abortion without parental notice and consent under Florida's parental-consent law. Judge Nordby sat on the panel with Judges Robert Long and M. Kemmerly Thomas. The news report does not identify an author of the opinion. | 3-0 | Joined majority |
Tim Osterhaus
Timothy D. Osterhaus earned a bachelor's degree with highest honors from King College in 1993 and a law degree from the University of Virginia in 1997. He clerked for U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp, worked in private practice (including at Arent Fox and Howrey & Simon), and was an assistant general counsel at the Florida Department of Education before serving as Florida's deputy solicitor general (2007-2012) and solicitor general (2012-2013). Gov. Rick Scott appointed him to the First District Court of Appeal on May 20, 2013, to fill the seat of retiring Judge Marguerite Davis. Ballotpedia reports he won a merit-retention election on Nov. 3, 2020, and his current term ends Jan. 5, 2027; a Florida Bar News report on an earlier retention cycle lists him as retained with 63.38 percent of the vote. News reports from 2024 through 2026 identify him as the court's chief judge.
How his record is described: News reports tie Judge Osterhaus to signed opinions in administrative-law, abortion-regulation, tobacco-litigation and criminal cases, and to a 2015 decision he joined upholding the University of Florida's ban on guns in student housing (see the Lewis entry). He also wrote a 2016 opinion deferring to the Department of Children and Families' interpretation of Medicaid rules in a nursing-home expense case (WUSF, April 6, 2016). The Federalist Society lists him among its speakers and contributors. The Florida Bar reported his lawyer-poll and election figures in earlier cycles; no 2026 Florida Bar poll figure was found. No organized campaign for or against his retention was found in search results. Note: the September 2025 open-carry decision McDaniels v. State was written by Judge Stephanie Ray and joined by Judges M.K. Thomas and Lori Rowe; no source placed Osterhaus or the other judges in this file on that panel.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| State v. Gainesville Woman Care (24-hour abortion waiting period) 2019-08 · Abortion | In a 2-1 decision, the court reversed a trial judge's summary judgment that had struck down Florida's 24-hour abortion waiting-period law and sent the case back for further proceedings. The majority, written by Judge Osterhaus and joined by Judge Harvey Jay, said the trial judge applied the wrong test for a facial challenge and that genuine factual disputes remained, including state physician declarations saying a waiting period fits informed-consent standards. Judge James Wolf dissented, writing that he agreed with the trial court that the waiting period is unconstitutional and that there was no evidence abortion information is more complex than other medical procedures. | 2-1 | Author of majority opinion |
| Medical-marijuana 'Leafly' memo case (Department of Health rulemaking) 2023-08 · Administrative law / medical marijuana | The court held that a Florida Department of Health memo barring medical-marijuana treatment centers from working with the online platform Leafly was an unadopted rule that the department could not enforce without going through formal rulemaking. The panel rejected the department's arguments that the memo was not a rule and merely restated existing law. Date is approximate, derived from the Florida Politics report's publication timing. | 3-0 (per news report describing a three-judge panel) | Author of majority opinion |
| Engle-progeny tobacco cases filed for deceased clients 2018-02 · Civil litigation / attorney conduct | The court upheld the dismissal of tobacco lawsuits that had been filed on behalf of clients who were already dead. Judge Osterhaus's opinion criticized the plaintiffs' lawyers for not verifying their claims before filing. | Author of majority opinion | |
| Department of Health 'dogs in bars' rule (Tampa and Orlando establishments) 2025-04 · Administrative law / state agency authority | A panel of Chief Judge Osterhaus and Judges Stephanie Ray and M. Kemmerly Thomas overturned an administrative law judge and sided with the Florida Department of Health's interpretation of its rule, which had the effect of blocking bars in Tampa and Orlando from allowing dogs. The news report does not identify an author of the opinion. | 3-0 | Joined majority |
| Baker County babysitter hot-car death convictions 2026-10 · Criminal law / jury instructions | The court overturned the convictions of a Baker County babysitter in the death of a 10-month-old left in a hot car, finding a jury-instruction error. Chief Judge Osterhaus partially dissented, arguing that only the felony-murder conviction should have been vacated. Osterhaus's partial dissent would have left the remaining convictions in place while vacating only the felony-murder count. | 2-1 in part | Dissent |
Clay Roberts
L. Clayton 'Clay' Roberts earned a B.S. in military history from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 1987 and a J.D. from Florida State University (Ballotpedia lists 1991; an FSU College of Law article describes him as a 1998 graduate, so sources conflict on the year). Before joining the bench he held state government posts, including director of the Florida Division of Elections (1999-2002) and deputy attorney general (2006). Gov. Charlie Crist announced his appointment to the First District Court of Appeal during a surprise visit to an FSU law classroom, to succeed retired Judge Richard Ervin III; he assumed office on Jan. 18, 2007. He served as the court's chief judge from 2015 to 2017. Ballotpedia reports he won a merit-retention election on Nov. 3, 2020, and his term ends in 2027; a Florida Bar News report on an earlier retention cycle lists him as retained with 64.15 percent of the vote.
How his record is described: News reports tie Judge Roberts to signed opinions in criminal, state-contracting, public-records and tax cases, and to a 2016 decision he joined (with Judges Scott Makar and Simone Marstiller) reversing a contempt finding against a lawyer whom a trial judge had ordered to take a breath test (Florida Politics). He sat on the panel that upheld James Leon Jackson's conviction in a 1984 Jacksonville child murder (News4Jax, April 30, 2020). Florida Bar News has quoted him on appellate administrative issues, including a proposal to let DCA judges establish alternate headquarters and the two-year appellate time limit under Marsy's Law. No 2026 Florida Bar poll figure was found. No organized campaign for or against his retention was found in search results.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clark v. State (Clay County DUI-manslaughter ATV death) 2021-04 · Criminal law | The court upheld a Clay County man's DUI-manslaughter conviction in the death of his son in an ATV crash. Judge Roberts's six-page opinion found the evidence sufficient for a jury to conclude the defendant was in physical control of the ATV. Judges Timothy Osterhaus and Harvey Jay joined. | 3-0 | Author of majority opinion |
| Arson prosecution of an 11-year-old 2016 · Criminal law / juvenile | The court reversed a trial court's refusal to dismiss an arson charge against an 11-year-old. Judge Roberts's opinion concluded the state had not shown the fire was started unlawfully and said the state's position would effectively rewrite the arson statute to remove the element of unlawfulness. | Author of majority opinion | |
| AT&T challenge to $360 million state telecommunications contract 2016-10 · State contracting / administrative law | Writing as chief judge for a unanimous panel, Roberts affirmed the Department of Management Services' award of a state telecommunications contract to a Harris Corp. subsidiary and rejected all of AT&T's arguments against the award. | 3-0 | Author of majority opinion |
| Public-records exemption for insurance claim disputes 2018 · Public records | The court approved the application of a public-records exemption covering certain insurance-claim records but, in Judge Roberts's opinion, described the exemption as limited in scope and said the trial court's further inquiry was not within its purview. | Author of majority opinion | |
| Communications services tax challenge (satellite vs. cable providers) 2015 · Taxes / state constitution | Judge L. Clayton Roberts wrote a 20-page majority opinion holding that Florida's communications services tax was unconstitutional because it unfairly favored cable providers over satellite providers. The year is not stated in the search snippet and should be confirmed against the opinion; the Florida Politics tag page for the judge is the source. | Author of majority opinion |
Raymond Treadwell
Ray Treadwell earned a bachelor's degree from the University of Florida and a J.D. from Yale Law School. He served as chief deputy general counsel in the Executive Office of the Governor under Gov. Ron DeSantis and as general counsel of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, and from 2023 was a shareholder at the Tallahassee firm Lawson Huck Gonzalez PLLC, co-founded by former Florida Supreme Court Justice Alan Lawson. Gov. DeSantis appointed him to the First District Court of Appeal on May 23, 2025, to fill the seat vacated by Judge Bradford Thomas; he was chosen from six finalists and assumed office on June 17, 2025. The November 2026 election is his first merit-retention vote.
How his record is described: No signed opinion, concurrence or dissent by Judge Treadwell could be tied to him through search results, which is consistent with his having joined the court in mid-2025. Third-party case aggregators (Counsel Stack, FLexlaw, Hall Approved) list him as a concurring judge on a number of unsigned per curiam affirmances in criminal and civil appeals, including Nero v. State (Jan. 7, 2026), Lincoln v. State (March 26, 2026), Wesson v. State (June 30, 2026) and Edwards v. State (July 31, 2026); those decisions affirm trial courts without written reasoning. No source placed him on the panels for the court's October 2026 Hope Florida grand-jury-report rulings or other high-profile 2026 cases. The Tallahassee Democrat (via Yahoo News) described him as one of the governor's former lawyers, and Mainstreet Daily News noted his former firm is a frequent outside counsel for the DeSantis administration. No Florida Bar poll figure and no organized campaign for or against his retention were found in search results.
Second District Court of Appeal (St. Petersburg)
Second District Court of Appeal (St. Petersburg)
J. Andrew "Drew" Atkinson
Judge Atkinson grew up in Fort Lauderdale and Bradenton, earned a bachelor's degree from Florida State University and a law degree with honors from Nova Southeastern University, and served as an enlisted soldier in the U.S. Army's 75th Ranger Regiment from 1997 to 2001. He began his legal career in the Florida Attorney General's Criminal Appeals Division and as a Deputy Solicitor General, clerked for Judge Melanie G. May of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, served as Assistant General Counsel to the Governor, practiced at the law firm Broad and Cassel, and was General Counsel of the Florida Department of State and then the Florida Department of Management Services. Gov. Rick Scott appointed him to the Second District Court of Appeal in January 2018 to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Judge Douglas A. Wallace; he was 44 and living in Tampa at the time. Voters retained him in the November 3, 2020 merit-retention election, and his current term ends January 5, 2027. In The Florida Bar's 2020 merit-retention poll of lawyers, 76% of responding lawyers who said they had knowledge of him supported retention.
How his record is described: No organized campaign for or against Judge Atkinson's retention was found in searches as of late October 2026, and no news coverage characterizing his record was located. Case-law databases show him sitting on many unsigned per curiam affirmances in 2024-2025 (for example Ademoye v. State, Rodriguez v. State and Dixon v. State, all October 2025), which by their nature do not identify an author or give reasons. Beyond the two items above, authored opinions could not be tied to him with the sources available in this research. The Florida Bar's biennial retention poll reported 76% support among responding lawyers in 2020; 2026 poll results were not located.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rivera v. State (No. 2D17-496) 2019-04 · Criminal law; 'Stand Your Ground' self-defense immunity | Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, Judge Atkinson reversed an aggravated-battery conviction and sent the case back for a new immunity hearing because, while the appeal was pending, the Legislature changed the 'Stand Your Ground' law to put the burden on the prosecution (rather than the defendant) at immunity hearings. The panel followed the court's earlier decision in Martin v. State treating the change as procedural and therefore applicable to pending cases, rejected the State's argument that the error was harmless because a jury had already rejected self-defense, and certified a conflict with the Third and Fourth District Courts of Appeal, which had reached the opposite conclusion. The Florida Supreme Court later resolved the conflict in Love v. State (2019), holding the amended burden of proof applies to immunity hearings held after the law's effective date, and sent Rivera back to the Second District; Judge Atkinson authored the court's follow-up opinion on remand on May 1, 2020. The text of that remand opinion could not be retrieved in this research. | 3-0 | Author of majority opinion |
| Franklin v. State, 272 So. 3d 860 (No. 2D17-2958), order on rehearing 2019-05 · Criminal post-conviction; motion for rehearing and to certify conflict | The court, in an order written by then-Chief Judge LaRose, denied the State's motion for rehearing and its motion to certify a conflict with other appellate courts in a self-represented prisoner's case. Judge Atkinson concurred in the result only and wrote a separate opinion explaining his reasoning. Only the heading of Judge Atkinson's separate opinion was accessible; its text could not be retrieved, so his reasoning is not summarized here. | 3-0 on the result | Concurring opinion |
Morris Silberman
Judge Silberman earned a bachelor's degree from Tulane University and a law degree from the University of Florida College of Law in 1982. He clerked for Judge Herboth S. Ryder of the Second District Court of Appeal, practiced with firms in Sarasota and Clearwater, and in 1988 founded his own Clearwater firm handling civil, business and contract litigation and appeals; he was president of the Clearwater Bar Association (1993-94) and served on The Florida Bar Board of Governors (1996-2000). Gov. Jeb Bush appointed him to the Second District in November 2000 from a field of 28 applicants to fill the seat of retiring Judge Monterey Campbell, and he took office January 2, 2001. He served as the court's chief judge from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013, served on the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission from 2003 to 2012 including as its chairman, and was president of the Council of Chief Judges of the State Courts of Appeal in 2021-22. Voters retained him in 2002 (69.7% yes), and again in 2008, 2014 and 2020; his current term ends January 5, 2027. In The Florida Bar's lawyer polls, 94% supported his retention in 2014 and 90% in 2020.
How his record is described: No organized campaign for or against Judge Silberman's retention was found in searches as of late October 2026. A 2014 Tampa Bay Times editorial recommended retaining him (along with Judges Altenbernd and Sleet), noting each had at least 91% support in that year's Florida Bar poll. Case-law databases show him on numerous unsigned per curiam affirmances in 2024-2026 (for example Loveland v. State, March 2025; Edwards v. State and Sands v. State, November 2025), which do not identify an author or give reasons. No opinion authored by Judge Silberman could be tied to him with the sources available in this research, so only one case in which he joined a reasoned ruling is listed. The Florida Bar's 2026 retention-poll results were not located.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mendes v. Citizens Property Insurance Corp. (No. 2D2024-0128) 2025-01 · Property insurance; civil procedure (summary disposition vs. summary judgment) | A three-judge panel reversed a county-court judgment for Citizens Property Insurance in a homeowner's claim after Citizens conceded that the trial court had wrongly treated its motion for summary disposition as a motion for summary judgment. The court sent the case back for further proceedings without deciding the merits of the insurance dispute. Opinion written by Judge Rothstein-Youakim; Judges Northcutt and Silberman concurred. | 3-0 | Joined majority |
Daniel H. Sleet
Judge Sleet graduated from Furman University in 1984 with a bachelor's degree in history and from Cumberland School of Law in 1987. He was a magistrate for the city of Birmingham, Alabama (1986-87), an assistant state attorney in Florida's 13th Judicial Circuit (Hillsborough County) from 1987 to 1991, and a lawyer in private practice with the Tampa firm Barr, Murman, Tonelli, Slother & Sleet from 1991 to 2006. Gov. Jeb Bush appointed him a circuit judge in the 13th Judicial Circuit in 2006, where he was later assigned to the domestic-relations (family) division. Gov. Rick Scott appointed him to the Second District Court of Appeal on December 21, 2012, to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Judge James W. Whatley; he was 51 and living in Tampa. He served as the court's chief judge, including during 2023-2024, when he announced progress on the court's new St. Petersburg courthouse after the court's relocation from Lakeland. Voters retained him in 2014 and 2020, and his current term ends January 5, 2027. In The Florida Bar's lawyer polls, 91% supported his retention in 2014 and 85% in 2020.
How his record is described: No opinion authored by Judge Sleet could be tied to him with the sources available in this research, so no rulings are listed. Case-law databases show him on many unsigned per curiam affirmances, including several in 2024 captioned with him as chief judge (Riddle v. State, February 2024; Cannata v. Knott, February 2024; Deleon v. State, July 2024; Copley v. State, August 2024; Medico v. State, December 2024) and others in 2025 (Hamlett v. State, Carter v. State, Brown v. State); such opinions do not name an author or give reasons. No organized campaign for or against his retention was found as of late October 2026. A 2014 Tampa Bay Times editorial recommended retaining him, and a 2014 voter blog (Sparker's Soapbox) said it found 'nothing of note' in his record. The Florida Bar's 2026 retention-poll results were not located.
Andrea Teves Smith
Judge Teves Smith earned her undergraduate degree from the University of Florida and her law degree from Stetson University College of Law in 1994. She practiced law in Polk County with the firm Peterson & Myers, P.A., from 1994 to 2013, becoming a partner. Gov. Rick Scott appointed her a circuit judge in the Tenth Judicial Circuit (Polk, Hardee and Highlands counties) in June 2013, replacing retired Judge J. David Langford; there she served in the felony, family and civil divisions, was administrative judge over the civil divisions, and chaired the circuit's Fairness and Diversity team. Gov. Scott announced her appointment to the Second District Court of Appeal on January 7, 2019, to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Judge Marva Crenshaw; she was 49 and living in Lakeland, and she took office February 1, 2019. Voters retained her in the November 3, 2020 election with 75.0% voting yes, and her current term ends January 5, 2027. In The Florida Bar's 2020 merit-retention poll, 82% of responding lawyers supported her retention.
How his record is described: No opinion authored by Judge Teves Smith could be tied to her with the sources available in this research, so no rulings are listed. Case-law databases list a Judge Smith on numerous unsigned Second District per curiam affirmances in 2024-2025 (for example State v. Caulkins, April 2024; Diaz-Rivera v. State, November 2024; Campbell v. State and Dedaj v. State, November 2025), which do not name an author or give reasons. No organized campaign for or against her retention and no news coverage characterizing her record were found as of late October 2026. Note on sourcing: the Wikipedia roster for the court lists Gov. Ron DeSantis as her appointing governor, but the governor's office appointment announcement of January 7, 2019 (published by Capital Soup) and her resignation letter from the circuit bench show the appointment was made by Gov. Rick Scott in the final days of his term; this file follows the appointment announcement. The Florida Bar's 2026 retention-poll results were not located.
Also on the ballot in this district (not yet researched)
Judges standing for retention, as listed by The Florida Bar. Backgrounds for these judges have not been researched yet; The Florida Bar publishes biographies for every judge on the ballot.
- Drew Atkinson
Third District Court of Appeal (Miami)
Third District Court of Appeal (Miami)
Kansas R. Gooden
Kansas R. Gooden holds a bachelor's degree from James Madison University and a law degree from St. Thomas University. Before joining the bench she spent about 16 years in private practice, most recently as a shareholder and appellate practice group leader at the firm Boyd & Jenerette, where she was board certified in appellate practice and handled more than 400 civil appeals. Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed her to the Third District Court of Appeal on June 28, 2024, to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Judge Eric Hendon. This is her first merit-retention election; judges appointed to a district court of appeal must stand for retention at the next general election held more than one year after taking office.
How his record is described: No opinion authored by Judge Gooden could be located through search snippets; the rulings listed above are cases where published panel listings show she joined the decision. In Wright-Johnson v. State (No. 3D23-1452, 2025) the Justia listing shows her as concurring in the result only, but the snippet did not describe the ruling. In the Miami-Dade County Bar Association's 2026 judicial poll (631 respondents, closed July 3, 2026), 232 lawyers said she should be retained, 91 said no and 247 had no opinion, about 71.8% 'yes' among those expressing a view. The Federalist Society lists her as a contributor on its website. No organized retention campaign for or against her was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contragolpe LLC v. 505 NE 30 Street, LLC (No. 3D23-1487) 2025-01 · Contract dispute / summary judgment | A three-judge panel reversed a Miami-Dade trial court's summary judgment, holding that the contract language was ambiguous and the trial judge should not have resolved that ambiguity by weighing conflicting outside evidence at the summary-judgment stage. The case was sent back for further proceedings. Opinion written by Judge Bokor. | Unanimous panel (Fernandez, Bokor, Gooden) | Joined majority |
| Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Williams (No. 3D24-0252) 2025-09 · Homeowner's insurance appeal | The panel affirmed a Miami-Dade trial court ruling for the homeowner in a property-insurance dispute in a short unsigned (per curiam) opinion that cited an earlier Third DCA decision, Citizens Property Insurance Corp. v. Laguerre (2018). Per curiam affirmance; no individual author. | Unanimous panel (Scales, Miller, Gooden) | Joined majority |
| Pilac Management, Ltd. v. Parque Towers Developers, LLC (No. 3D25-1698) 2026-10 · Condominium purchase deposits | The panel reversed a trial court decision and sent the case back in a dispute over deposits owed to condominium purchasers, relying on the court's earlier ruling in the same litigation that the developer's construction delay did not breach the purchase agreements. Opinion written by Chief Judge Logue. | Unanimous panel (Logue, Lindsey, Gooden) | Joined majority |
Monica Gordo
Monica Gordo earned both her bachelor's degree and her law degree from the University of Miami and was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1999. She worked for more than 11 years as an assistant state attorney in Miami-Dade, where she became a division chief supervising a felony division. She was elected to the Eleventh Judicial Circuit (Miami-Dade) in 2010, was sworn in in January 2011 and served about eight years in the criminal, civil and family divisions. Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed her to the Third District Court of Appeal on April 25, 2019, to fill the vacancy created when Barbara Lagoa was elevated to the Florida Supreme Court. Voters retained her on Nov. 3, 2020, with about 73.8% voting yes.
How his record is described: In the Florida Bar's 2020 statewide merit-retention poll, 78% of responding lawyers recommended retaining Judge Gordo, and voters retained her that year with about 73.8% (Ballotpedia). In the Miami-Dade County Bar Association's 2026 judicial poll (631 respondents, closed July 3, 2026), 339 lawyers said she should be retained, 101 said no and 125 had no opinion, about 77.1% 'yes' among those expressing a view. The Federalist Society lists her as a contributor on its website. No organized retention campaign for or against her was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| City of Aventura v. Stein (No. 3D19-0523) 2020-06 · Red-light camera citations | The panel reversed a county court's dismissal of a right-on-red camera ticket. The driver did not dispute that the camera photos showed probable cause but argued the city's vendor guidelines violated state law; the court rejected that argument and reinstated the citation. Opinion written by Judge Logue. | Unanimous panel (Logue, Salter, Gordo) | Joined majority |
| City of Miami v. Miami-Dade County (No. 3D21-1411) 2022 · Dispute between the City of Miami and Miami-Dade County | Judge Gordo wrote a dissent from the panel's decision in this case between the city and the county. The search snippet available did not describe the subject of the dispute or the reasoning of the majority or the dissent. Details of the dissent could not be verified from available snippets; see the opinion text at the source link. | Divided panel | Dissent |
| Valdes v. State (No. 3D23-633) 2024-03 · Criminal appeal / community control revocation | After the State conceded error, the court reversed an order revoking a defendant's community control because the written order listed violations the trial judge had not announced in open court, and sent the case back for the order to be corrected. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
| City of Miami v. Marcos (No. 3D24-0082) 2025-02 · Civil lawsuit against the City of Miami / default judgment | The court reversed a default judgment on liability that had been entered against the City of Miami, finding that the trial judge abused her discretion by striking the city's pleadings and entering a default. The case was sent back for a new trial on liability only, leaving the damages award in place. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
| Miami-Dade County v. Garavan (No. 3D25-0014) 2026-03 · Sovereign immunity / damages against the county | The court upheld most of a judgment against Miami-Dade County but reversed the award of non-economic damages, holding that the county is entitled to sovereign immunity and the plaintiff's recovery is limited to the kinds of damages the state has expressly waived immunity for. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
Fleur Jeannine Lobree
Fleur Jeannine Lobree earned her bachelor's degree from Florida State University and her law degree from the University of Miami. Her earlier career included work as an assistant state attorney in Miami-Dade, an assistant attorney general, a law clerk to Third DCA Judge Rodolfo Sorondo Jr., and an associate at the law firm Hicks, Anderson & Kneale. She served as a Miami-Dade County Court judge from 2011 to 2013 and, after appointment by Gov. Rick Scott, as an Eleventh Judicial Circuit judge from 2013 to 2015, then returned to the State Attorney's Office. Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed her to the Third District Court of Appeal on April 25, 2019, to fill the vacancy created when Robert Luck was elevated to the Florida Supreme Court. Voters retained her on Nov. 3, 2020, with about 72.8% voting yes.
How his record is described: In the Florida Bar's 2020 statewide merit-retention poll, 79% of responding lawyers recommended retaining Judge Lobree, and voters retained her that year with about 72.8% (Ballotpedia). In the Miami-Dade County Bar Association's 2026 judicial poll (631 respondents, closed July 3, 2026), 342 lawyers said she should be retained, 76 said no and 151 had no opinion, about 81.8% 'yes' among those expressing a view. Published case listings show she frequently sits on panels issuing short unsigned affirmances. No organized retention campaign for or against her was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Miami-Dade County v. Miami Gardens Square One, Inc. (No. 3D20-1512) 2020-11 · COVID-19 county curfew orders | The court reversed a trial judge's temporary injunction that had blocked Miami-Dade County from enforcing curfew provisions in its COVID-19 emergency orders against a business. The panel found the business had not shown it was likely to win its claim that state orders preempted the county curfew, and vacated the injunction. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
| Ramle International Corp. v. Miami-Dade County (No. 3D20-0114) 2023-10 · Civil suit against Miami-Dade County | The court affirmed a trial court's involuntary dismissal of a company's lawsuit against Miami-Dade County. The search snippet did not describe the subject of the underlying suit. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
| D.J. v. State (No. 3D23-1210) 2023-11 · Involuntary commitment | After the State conceded error, the panel reversed a Miami-Dade order involuntarily committing a person in a short unsigned opinion. Per curiam opinion; no individual author. | Unanimous panel | Joined majority |
| Fox One, LLC v. City of Miami (Nos. 3D24-0211 & 3D24-0936) 2025-12 · Building-permit fees / class action against the City of Miami | The court reversed the dismissal of a proposed class action claiming the City of Miami collected building-permit fee surpluses beyond what the law allows, holding that the question could not be decided on a motion to dismiss and the case should proceed. Opinion written by Judge Bronwyn Miller. | Unanimous panel | Joined majority |
Thomas Logue
Thomas W. Logue earned his undergraduate degree from Dickinson College and his law degree from Duke University, where he served on the editorial board of the Duke Law Journal. Before joining the bench he spent about 30 years as an assistant county attorney for Miami-Dade County, litigating cases and arguing appeals in state and federal courts and advising the county commission and property appraiser. Gov. Rick Scott appointed him to the Third District Court of Appeal in 2012 (Ballotpedia lists his start date as June 7, 2012; the Florida Bar's appellate section newsletter reports the appointment as July 6, 2012). He has served as the court's chief judge; 2025 opinions list him as 'Logue, C.J.' He was retained by voters on Nov. 3, 2020, and has taught at the Florida Judicial College.
How his record is described: In the Florida Bar's 2020 statewide merit-retention poll, 85% of responding lawyers recommended retaining Judge Logue, the highest share among Third DCA judges on that ballot; voters retained him on Nov. 3, 2020 (Ballotpedia; the percentage was not captured in search snippets). In the Miami-Dade County Bar Association's 2026 judicial poll (631 respondents, closed July 3, 2026), 343 lawyers said he should be retained, 61 said no and 158 had no opinion, about 84.9% 'yes' among those expressing a view, the highest of the five Third DCA judges on the 2026 ballot. A St. Thomas University law school profile says he has written hundreds of opinions, including on the employment status of Uber drivers and camera-based traffic citations. No organized retention campaign for or against him was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| City of Aventura v. Jimenez 2016-07 · Red-light camera citations | The court reversed the dismissal of a red-light camera ticket issued by a private vendor on Aventura's behalf. Judge Logue wrote that the vendor's role in sorting camera images was essentially clerical and that a police officer must still make a real review before a citation issues. The ruling disagreed with a Fourth District decision striking down Hollywood's program, and the court certified questions to the Florida Supreme Court. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
| McGillis v. Department of Economic Opportunity (No. 3D15-2758) 2017-02 · Gig-economy employment status / unemployment benefits | The court held that a former Uber driver was an independent contractor, not an employee, for purposes of state reemployment-assistance (unemployment) benefits. Judge Logue wrote that the key factor is how much control the company has over the work, and that drivers decide whether, when, where and how to give rides, which does not fit the control an employer has over a traditional employee. The ruling addressed only unemployment benefits, not employment status for all purposes. | Unanimous panel (Logue, Lagoa, Salter) | Author of majority opinion |
| Perez-Gurri Corp. v. McLeod (Nos. 3D15-2590 & 3D17-1478) 2017 · Civil summary judgment | The court reversed a summary judgment entered by a Miami-Dade trial court, finding that a genuine dispute over a material fact remained and the case should not have been decided without a trial. | Unanimous panel | Author of majority opinion |
| City of Aventura v. Stein (No. 3D19-0523) 2020-06 · Red-light camera citations | The court reversed a county court's dismissal of a right-on-red camera ticket. The driver did not dispute that the camera photos showed probable cause but argued the city's vendor guidelines violated state law; the panel rejected that argument and reinstated the citation. | Unanimous panel (Logue, Salter, Gordo) | Author of majority opinion |
| Pilac Management, Ltd. v. Parque Towers Developers, LLC (No. 3D25-1698) 2026-10 · Condominium purchase deposits | The court reversed a trial court decision and sent the case back in a dispute over deposits owed to condominium purchasers, relying on the court's earlier ruling in the same litigation that the developer's construction delay did not breach the purchase agreements. | Unanimous panel (Logue, Lindsey, Gooden) | Author of majority opinion |
Bronwyn Catherine Miller
Bronwyn C. Miller earned her bachelor's degree from Barnard College and her law degree from the University of Miami. She began her career as a prosecutor in the Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office and has taught as an adjunct professor at Florida International University. Gov. Jeb Bush appointed her to the Miami-Dade County Court in 2005, and Gov. Charlie Crist elevated her to the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in 2010. Gov. Rick Scott appointed her to the Third District Court of Appeal in late 2018; she was sworn in in early 2019 (Ballotpedia lists 2019 as her start). Voters retained her on Nov. 3, 2020, with about 75% voting yes.
How his record is described: In the Florida Bar's 2020 statewide merit-retention poll, 83% of responding lawyers recommended retaining Judge Miller, and voters retained her that year with about 75% (Ballotpedia). In October 2025 the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) filed formal charges against her over text messages she exchanged with Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle; according to the ABA Journal and Florida Bulldog, the JQC alleged the texts sought to influence how the State Attorney's Office handled a post-conviction resentencing case in which Miller was a victim and witness, and the charges cite Canons 1, 2A, 3B(9) and 5A of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct. Her attorney, Warren Lindsey, filed a motion to dismiss in April 2026 arguing the texts are speech protected by the First Amendment and that she was acting as a crime victim and fact witness; the JQC hearing panel chaired by Judge Morris Silberman said it would rule in writing. No ruling on the motion, and no Florida Supreme Court decision (which would make any final determination on discipline), was found in search results as of late October 2026. A column on SocialMiami.com argued she was unfairly accused. In the Miami-Dade County Bar Association's 2026 judicial poll (631 respondents, closed July 3, 2026), 314 lawyers said she should be retained, 172 said no and 91 had no opinion, about 64.6% 'yes' among those expressing a view, the lowest of the five Third DCA judges on the 2026 ballot. No organized retention campaign for or against her was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gutierrez v. Gutierrez (No. 3D24-0895) 2025-09 · Family law / attorney's fees | Judge Miller wrote the panel's opinion in a former husband's appeal of an order denying his request for attorney's fees and costs in a family-law case. The search snippet did not show how the appeal was decided. Disposition could not be verified from available snippets; see the opinion text at the source link. | Panel of Miller, Lobree and Gooden | Author of majority opinion |
| Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Williams (No. 3D24-0252) 2025-09 · Homeowner's insurance appeal | The panel affirmed a Miami-Dade trial court ruling for the homeowner in a property-insurance dispute in a short unsigned (per curiam) opinion that cited an earlier Third DCA decision, Citizens Property Insurance Corp. v. Laguerre (2018). Per curiam affirmance; no individual author. | Unanimous panel (Scales, Miller, Gooden) | Joined majority |
| Fox One, LLC v. City of Miami (Nos. 3D24-0211 & 3D24-0936) 2025-12 · Building-permit fees / class action against the City of Miami | The court reversed the dismissal of a proposed class action claiming the City of Miami collected building-permit fee surpluses beyond what the law allows, holding that the question could not be decided on a motion to dismiss and the case should proceed. | Unanimous panel (including Lobree) | Author of majority opinion |
| Scott v. State (No. 3D24-2211) 2026-10 · Criminal appeal / probation revocation and sentencing | The court affirmed the revocation of a defendant's probation and his sentence of life in prison as a prison releasee reoffender. Judge Miller concurred. The snippet identifies Miller as concurring but does not describe her separate reasoning. | Affirmed | Concurring opinion |
Fourth District Court of Appeal (West Palm Beach)
Fourth District Court of Appeal (West Palm Beach)
Alan O. Forst
Alan O. Forst was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Rick Scott on March 7, 2013 and took the oath of office in April 2013. He attended Georgetown University and earned his law degree from the Catholic University of America, according to The Ballot Brief. Before joining the court he spent more than two decades in federal positions in Washington, D.C. (including the Justice and Labor departments, the Merit Systems Protection Board and the EEOC), practiced at the Crary Buchanan firm in Stuart, and from 2001 chaired Florida's Unemployment Appeals Commission (now the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission) under Govs. Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist, according to his Federalist Society biography. He was previously retained by voters in 2014 (75.07 percent, per Florida Bar News) and in 2020 (percentage not located; the Florida Bar's 2020 lawyer poll showed 78 percent recommending retention). He lives in Martin County.
How his record is described: Judge Forst's name appears on the Florida Bar's list of 22 district court of appeal judges who qualified for the November 2026 merit-retention ballot. He has twice been retained by voters (2014 and 2020). In 2013 Sunshine State News described him as a 'conservative jurist' when Gov. Scott appointed him, and the Federalist Society's website hosts a contributor biography for him; this guide does not characterize his judicial philosophy. Most of his publicly indexed recent decisions are unsigned per curiam affirmances; the signed opinion most widely covered in the press is the 2018 assignment-of-benefits insurance ruling. No organized campaign for or against his retention, and no 2026 Florida Bar merit-retention poll result, was found in the sources searched.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Restoration 1 of Port St. Lucie v. Ark Royal Insurance Co. 2018-09 · Property insurance / assignment of benefits | The court held that a homeowner's insurance policy may require the written consent of all insureds and the mortgagee before a post-loss assignment of benefits to a contractor is valid. The decision disagreed with a 2017 Fifth District ruling on similar policy language; the Legislature later changed the assignment-of-benefits law in 2019. Florida Politics reported the opinion was written by Judge Forst for a unanimous three-judge panel. | 3-0 | Author of majority opinion |
| Peterson v. (Parkland shooting victims' families) - Scot Peterson civil appeal 2025-01 · Parkland school shooting / government-employee liability | A three-judge panel (Judges Damoorgian, Levine and Forst) rejected former Broward school resource officer Scot Peterson's argument that a trial judge should have granted him summary judgment, allowing negligence lawsuits by victims' families to move toward trial. The court issued its ruling without a written explanation. The Hill identified the panel members; no opinion author is listed because the decision was issued without reasoning. | 3-0 (no written opinion) | Joined majority |
| Boca Raton cemetery sale attorney-fees dispute 2018-01 · Attorney fees / civil litigation | The panel ruled for the developer and law-firm defendants in a dispute over attorney fees arising from the $6.2 million sale of a Boca Raton cemetery. Judge Spencer Levine wrote the opinion; the Daily Business Review reported that Judge Forst joined it but 'seemed especially torn.' Characterization of Forst's view is the Daily Business Review's. | 3-0 | Joined majority |
| Coney v. State (4D2024-2828) and similar 2025 criminal appeals 2025-10 · Criminal appeals (per curiam affirmances) | In this and numerous other 2025 criminal appeals (e.g., Youngblood v. State, Gary v. State, Isreal v. State), panels including Judge Forst affirmed trial-court judgments without a written opinion. Listed to show routine workload; these one-line affirmances contain no reasoning. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
Mark W. Klingensmith
Mark W. Klingensmith was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Rick Scott and assumed office on June 27, 2013, after serving as a circuit judge in the 19th Judicial Circuit (2011-2013). He earned his bachelor's (1982) and law (1985) degrees from the University of Florida and an LL.M. in judicial studies from Duke University in 2016. Before taking the bench he spent about 25 years in civil litigation private practice, became board certified in civil trial law in 2001, and served as an elected commissioner, vice mayor and mayor of the Town of Sewall's Point. He served as the Fourth DCA's chief judge beginning June 10, 2022 (re-elected in 2023) and in January 2024 was elected president of the Florida Conference of District Court of Appeal Judges. Voters retained him in 2014 (74.27 percent, per Florida Bar News) and in 2020 (63.0 percent, per Ballotpedia).
How his record is described: Judge Klingensmith is on the Florida Bar's list of DCA judges who qualified for the November 2026 merit-retention ballot and has been retained twice before (2014 and 2020). Bar-association and Florida Bar News coverage of him focuses on his administrative roles as the court's chief judge (2022-2024) and as president of the statewide conference of DCA judges. The search results surfaced him mainly as a panel member on unsigned affirmances; no news coverage identifying him as the author of a particular opinion was found, so the rulings listed here describe panel decisions he joined. No organized campaign for or against his retention, and no 2026 Florida Bar merit-retention poll result, was found in the sources searched.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cole v. Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Co. (4D22-1054) 2023-05 · Property insurance / pre-suit notice law | The court held that Florida's 2021 requirement that homeowners give insurers pre-suit notice before filing a lawsuit (section 627.70152) is procedural and therefore applies to policies issued before the law took effect, affirming dismissal of a homeowner's suit. Other district courts later split on the question. The Daily Business Review's coverage names Judges Klingensmith, Levine and Damoorgian as the panel; the search results did not confirm which judge authored the opinion. | unknown | Joined majority |
| Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners v. Herring 2026-07 · Local government litigation (Palm Beach County) | The court affirmed the trial court's ruling in a case involving the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners; Judges Conner and Klingensmith and an associate judge concurred, with the associate judge writing a separate concurrence. The search results did not show the underlying subject matter. Only the disposition line was available in the search snippet. | 3-0 | Joined majority |
| Bluestone v. Broward County 2024-06 · Broward County appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel including then-Chief Judge Klingensmith affirmed a Broward County trial-court ruling without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
Johnathan D. Lott
Johnathan D. Lott (his first name is also spelled 'Jonathan' in some official sources) was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Ron DeSantis in the fall of 2025; the governor's appointment letter was dated Oct. 30, 2025, and Ballotpedia lists him as assuming office on Nov. 12, 2025. He filled the vacancy created when Judge Ed Artau left the court for the federal bench. He earned his bachelor's degree from the University of Florida and his law degree from the University of Chicago Law School (2014), and previously served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. DeSantis first appointed him to the 17th Judicial Circuit (Broward County) bench in November 2024, where he took office Jan. 1, 2025 and served in the family division. This is his first merit-retention election.
How his record is described: Judge Lott has served on the Fourth DCA for less than a year and is on the Florida Bar's list of judges who qualified for the November 2026 merit-retention ballot. The 17th Circuit's chief judge praised him as a respected jurist when he was elevated, according to Florida Bar News. No signed opinion authored by Judge Lott, and no news coverage of a ruling he wrote, was found in the sources searched; the decisions listed are unsigned affirmances he joined. No organized campaign for or against his retention, and no Florida Bar merit-retention poll result for him, was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lewis v. Barrett (4D2024-2362) 2026-03 · Broward civil appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Judges Gross, Ciklin and Lott affirmed a Broward circuit court ruling without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
| Bovell v. Jablonski (4D2025-1526) 2026-03 · Broward civil appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Judges Klingensmith, Shaw and Lott affirmed the trial court without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
| Lee v. State (4D2025-2314 / 4D2025-2316) 2026-05 · Criminal appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Judges Ciklin, Gerber and Lott affirmed the defendant's convictions or sentences in consolidated appeals without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
Shannon K. Shaw
Shannon K. Shaw, of Jupiter, was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Ron DeSantis on July 17, 2025, filling the vacancy created by the resignation of Judge Martha Warner; Ballotpedia lists her as assuming office on Oct. 1, 2025. She earned her bachelor's degree from Duke University and her law degree from Vanderbilt University Law School. Before her appointment she served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida beginning in 2017, was an associate at the law firm Hunton & Williams, and clerked for U.S. District Judges K. Michael Moore and James King in the Southern District of Florida. This is her first merit-retention election.
How his record is described: Judge Shaw has served on the Fourth DCA for about a year and is on the Florida Bar's list of judges who qualified for the November 2026 merit-retention ballot. No signed opinion authored by Judge Shaw, and no news coverage of a ruling she wrote, was found in the sources searched; the decisions listed are unsigned affirmances she joined. No organized campaign for or against her retention, and no Florida Bar merit-retention poll result for her, was found.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ardella v. State (4D2025-0035) 2025-12 · Criminal appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Chief Judge Kuntz and Judges Ciklin and Shaw affirmed the trial court without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
| Lakey v. State (4D2025-2111) 2025-11 · Criminal appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Judges Conner, Klingensmith and Shaw affirmed the trial court without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
| 7th Avenue Village v. Perez (4D2025-0315) 2025-12 · Civil appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Chief Judge Kuntz and Judges Ciklin and Shaw affirmed the trial court without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
| Bovell v. Jablonski (4D2025-1526) 2026-03 · Broward civil appeal (per curiam affirmance) | A panel of Judges Klingensmith, Shaw and Lott affirmed the trial court without a written opinion. Unsigned affirmance; no reasoning available. | 3-0 (per curiam, unsigned) | Joined majority |
Also on the ballot in this district (not yet researched)
Judges standing for retention, as listed by The Florida Bar. Backgrounds for these judges have not been researched yet; The Florida Bar publishes biographies for every judge on the ballot.
- Caroline Cahill Shepherd
Fifth District Court of Appeal (Daytona Beach)
Fifth District Court of Appeal (Daytona Beach)
John M. Harris
B.A. in psychology and criminal justice, University of Oklahoma (1988); J.D., Florida State University College of Law (1991). Practiced business and commercial litigation in Brevard County for about 11 years. Appointed to the Brevard County Court by Gov. Jeb Bush in 2002 and to the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit (Brevard and Seminole counties) in 2006, where he served as an administrative judge and was twice elected chief judge (2013, 2017). Appointed to the Fifth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Rick Scott in July 2018 to succeed Judge Thomas D. Sawaya; retained by voters in 2020.
Notable:
- Has served as Chief Judge of the Fifth District Court of Appeal.Sources: en.wikipedia.org · ballotpedia.org
Florida Bar retention poll: The Florida Bar discontinued its merit-retention poll in 2023; no 2026 poll exists.
Scott D. Makar
Born Oct. 15, 1959, in Mahopac, N.Y. B.S., Mercer University (1980); MBA and M.A. in economics (1982), J.D. with honors (1987) and Ph.D. in economics (1993), all from the University of Florida. Appellate attorney at Holland & Knight (1989-2001), chief of the appellate division of Jacksonville's Office of General Counsel (2001-2008) and Florida Solicitor General (2007-2012), arguing five cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. Appointed to the First District Court of Appeal by Gov. Rick Scott on Feb. 6, 2012, and recommissioned to the Fifth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Ron DeSantis on Jan. 1, 2023, when the appellate districts were redrawn. Has taught at several law schools.
Notable:
- Argued cases for the state before the U.S. Supreme Court and Florida Supreme Court as Florida's Solicitor General before joining the appellate bench.Sources: en.wikipedia.org
Florida Bar retention poll: The Florida Bar discontinued its merit-retention poll in 2023; no 2026 poll exists.
Major rulings and how this judge voted
| Case | What it decided | Vote | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Barger v. Candow-Yost (5D2024-0904) 2025-01-10 · Other | A Fifth DCA panel affirmed the trial court without a written majority opinion (per curiam). Judges Edwards and Eisnaugle concurred; Makar dissented with a written opinion. The reasoning of the dissent was not available in search results. | 2-1 | |
| Pendergrass v. State (5D23-2860) and Nye v. State (5D23-2776) 2024-01-26 · Courts & procedure | In two criminal appeals decided the same day, the panel affirmed the convictions; Makar concurred in the result but wrote separately, declining to rely on the court's summary-affirmance rule. Both concurrences take the same position on the summary-affirmance rule. | 3-0 (concurring in result) | |
| Johnson v. State (First DCA) 2019 · Courts & procedure | The First DCA denied, per curiam, a petition for a belated appeal; Makar dissented, arguing the hearing officer had read the petitioner's factual allegations too narrowly. From Makar's First DCA years (2012-2022), before he was reassigned to the Fifth DCA in 2023. | 2-1 | |
| Joseph v. Dyck-O'Neal, Inc. and Higgins v. Dyck-O'Neal, Inc. (First DCA) 2016-09 · Other | In mortgage deficiency-judgment cases, the First DCA reversed per curiam; Makar dissented, writing that he would affirm or, alternatively, certify conflict with other district courts so the Florida Supreme Court could resolve it, and separately dissented from the denial of certification. Makar's dissents in these consumer-debt cases are among his more frequently indexed First DCA separate writings. | 2-1 |
F. Rand Wallis
B.A. in political science, Furman University (1989); J.D., Stetson University College of Law (1992). Assistant state attorney in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit for two years, then in private practice in Orlando (Cameron, Marriott, Walsh, Hodges & Coleman; from 1996 Cabaniss, McDonald, Smith & Wiggins). Appointed to the Ninth Judicial Circuit (Orange and Osceola counties) by Gov. Charlie Crist in 2008 and to the Fifth District Court of Appeal by Gov. Rick Scott in 2013 to succeed Judge Bruce Jacobus.
Notable:
- One of three Fifth DCA judges (with John M. Harris and Scott D. Makar) identified by Ballotpedia as standing for merit retention in November 2026.Sources: ballotpedia.org
Florida Bar retention poll: The Florida Bar discontinued its merit-retention poll in 2023; no 2026 poll exists.
Also on the ballot in this district (not yet researched)
Judges standing for retention, as listed by The Florida Bar. Backgrounds for these judges have not been researched yet; The Florida Bar publishes biographies for every judge on the ballot.
- Frederic Rand Wallis
Sixth District Court of Appeal (Lakeland)
Sixth District Court of Appeal (Lakeland)
No appellate judges from this district are on the 2026 ballot, according to The Florida Bar.
Fifth DCA Judges Joe Boatwright, Eric Eisnaugle, Harvey Jay, Paige Kilbane, John MacIver, Jordan Pratt and Adrian Soud stood for retention in November 2024 (Jacksonville Daily Record, Oct. 11, 2024) and are not on the 2026 ballot. Judges Kerry I. Evander (last retained 2020 with 72.3%) and Dan Traver are listed under 'Former Judges' on the Fifth DCA website, so they are not on the 2026 ballot either.