KENNETH BROWN, APPELLANT,
v.
IN RE: NAME CHANGE, 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.
A facially sufficient petition for a name change should be granted absent evidence of wrongful or fraudulent purpose.
An inmate, Kenneth S. Brown, petitioned to change his name for religious purposes. The Department of Corrections objected to safeguard institutional i…
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 Petition For Name Change cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Judge.
The appellant seeks review of a final order denying his petition for change of name. We reverse.
Kenneth S. Brown, an inmate, petitioned the trial court requesting that his name be changed to Akenaton-Yahkub Azrael. The petition was sworn to and complied with the statutory criteria set forth in section 68.07, Florida Statutes (1991). The Depart ment of Corrections filed a response acknowledging Brown’s right to assume another name, but urged an objection to the name change “to safeguard legitimate institutional and penological interests.” The record is silent as to whether Brown was given an opportunity to present evidence and be heard, but it appears to us that the trial court summarily denied the petition without the benefit of an evidentiary proceeding.
The petition states that Brown desires to change his name for religious purposes only, and that he has no intention of furthering an ulterior or illegal design. We have determined that a facially sufficient petition for a name change should be granted where there is no evidence of a wrongful or fraudulent purpose. Isom v. Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit, 437 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); see also, Davis v. State, 510 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Consistent with Isom and Davis, the petition should not have been summarily denied.
We recognize the trial court may have thought that the name change might adversely affect the security interests of the Department of Corrections. Without conducting an evidentiary hearing on this matter, however, the trial court was without any basis for determining the concerns of the Department. See Casey v. State, 604 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and BLUE, J." concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hoyos v. Singletary, 639 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…tructions for the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing on Hoyos’ petition. Ordinarily, a facially sufficient petition for name change should be granted in the absence of evidence of a wrongful or fraudulent purpose. See Brown v. Name Change, 611 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). The trial court committed reversible error when it failed to provide Hoyos with an opportunity to present evidence and to be heard on the issue of whether or not his reasons for seeking a name change were without ulterior or ille…
-
Finfrock v. State, 932 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…ll restoration of civil rights has occurred.” § 68.07(2)(k), Fla. Stat. (2005). If a petition for name change is facially sufficient, it should be granted so long as there is no evidence of a wrongful or fraudulent purpose. See Brown v. Name Change, 611 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); see also Hoyos v. Singletary, 639 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (holding that, because appellant’s petition was facially sufficient, he was entitled to an evidentiary hearing so that he could prove that his motivation for changi…
-
In re Name Change Petition of Byron Suber, 675 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…f two felonies, the first in 1990 and the second in 1994. Absent an evidentiary hearing, these allegations control. I would find the ex post facto question preserved. See Hoyos v. Singletary, 639 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Brown v. Name Change, 611 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Gosby v. Third Judicial Circuit, 586 So. 2d 1056 (Fla.1991); Casey v. State, 604 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); In re Boyd, 627 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); In re Keppro, 573 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)(holding that summary…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isom v. The Cir. Court OF the Tenth Jud. Cir., 437 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Casey v. State, 604 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- In re Petition for Changing Name of Stanley Harvey Davis v. State, 510 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)