WILLIE L. WILLIAMS, I.L. HOSFORD, EDWARD WILLIAMS, ANNICE WILLIAMS, AND DARRELL CLAIR AND VERNA CLAIR, HIS WIFE, AS SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO TERRELL E. YON, ALL AS SURETIES FOR BARRY D. BARNES, APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Sureties on an appearance bond for criminal defendant Barry Barnes challenged a trial court order declaring their bonds forfeited after Barnes failed to appear. The appellate court dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds, finding the trial court's order was not yet final.
The court did not reach the substantive issues because it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal; the trial court's order was not final as required for appellate review.
[1] An order declaring appearance bonds forfeited is not a final, appealable order until a judgment is entered pursuant to the relevant statute.
[2] An appeal from a nonfinal order that does not fall within the enumerated categories of appealable nonfinal orders will be dismissed.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the order from which the appeal is taken was not final and is a nonappealable nonfinal order”
Establishes the jurisdictional defect that prevented appellate review of the substantive issues
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBarry Barnes was prosecuted on criminal charges in Liberty County under an initial information. The State discontinued prosecution in Liberty County a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Bond Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Chief Judge.
Willie Williams and others, the appellants, became sureties on appearance bonds aggregating $100,000 that were given by Barry Barnes, as principal, to secure his appearance to answer criminal charges on which Barnes was initially prosecuted by information filed in the circuit court of the second judicial circuit in Liberty County. Venue lay also in Leon County, within the same circuit, and the State discontinued its prosecution in Liberty County in order to prosecute a new information charging Barnes for related offenses in Leon. After the new information was dismissed upon the circuit court’s judgment that the statute on which the charges were predicated was unconstitutional, and this court reversed that judgment, State v. Barnes, 404 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), Barnes failed to appear as ordered before the circuit court, in Leon County, and on the State’s motion the court declared the bonds forfeited.
Chief Judge Willis’ order carefully addresses and finally rejects the sureties’ contentions that their bonds, styled and filed in the “County of Liberty,” expressed no obligation to secure Barnes’ appearance to answer the information filed in Leon County, or that they were discharged by the absence of any prior notice to them of that obligation, and that they at any rate were effectively discharged when the circuit court dismissed the information filed in Leon County-
We cannot reach these substantive issues because the order from which the appeal is taken was not final and is a nonappealable nonfinal order. Indeed, its concluding sentence is: “Appropriate documents shall be prepared to give effect to this Order, and to proceed to entry of judgment pursuant to Section 903.27, Florida Statutes, 1981.” As it does not appear that judgment has been entered as provided by section 903.27(1), nor that appellants have surely abandoned remedies available in circuit court under section 903.26(5) or 903.27(2), the appeal is DIS MISSED without prejudice to appellants’ rights to appeal from a final judgment. Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(b)(1), 9.110(a), 9.130; Huie v. State, 92 So. 2d 264 (Fla.1957).
SHIVERS and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chase v. Orange Cnty., 511 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…nd are interlocutory in nature, thus non-appealable. On appeal from a final judgment of forfeiture, “all interlocutory steps in the proceeding leading up to the judgment would then be subject to review.” 92 So. 2d at 268. See also Williams v. State, 431 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). To support jurisdiction, appellant cites several cases, but they are inapposite. In American Druggists’ Insurance Co. v. State, 410 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), the court affirmed a “judgment of estrea-ture.” In Resolute Insu…
-
Bonds v. Orange Cnty., 913 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…Al Estes Bonding, Inc. v. Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners, 845 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Schmidt v. Osceola County, 517 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Chase v. Orange County, 511 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Williams v. State, 431 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). . See Huie v. State, 92 So. 2d 264 (Fla.1957). . See § 903.26(7), Fla. Stat. (“The payment by a surety of a forfeiture under the provisions of this law shall have the same effect on the bond as payment of a judgment.”) Huie v.…
-
Allied Fid. Ins. Co. v. State of Fla. & St. Lucie Cnty., 462 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…PER CURIAM. An order forfeiting bond constitutes a non-final, non-appealable order and accordingly we dismiss this appeal. Williams v. State, 431 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Allied Fidelity Insurance Co. v. State, 384 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). ANSTEAD, C.J., and LETTS and DELL, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Huie v. State, 92 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1957)
- State v. Barnes, 404 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)