SCOTT STANLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
CRYSTAL BERRY, 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.
The court affirmed the circuit court's denial of appellant's motion for insolvency, holding that in non-criminal proceedings, an incarcerated party declared indigent in the lower tribunal does not retain that presumption on appeal, and the appellant failed to provide the required affidavit of indigency.
In non-criminal proceedings, an incarcerated party declared indigent in the lower tribunal does not retain that presumption on appeal, and a motion for insolvency must be supported by an affidavit containing specific economic information.
[1] In non-criminal proceedings, the presumption of indigency for incarcerated parties declared indigent in the lower tribunal does not apply on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Stanley, an incarcerated party, sought a declaration of insolvency in a non-criminal proceeding and moved to defer court costs and fees.…
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 Affidavit Of Indigency cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The court has considered appellant’s motion for review of the circuit court’s order denying insolvency. We affirm the circuit court’s denial of insolvency. Appellant has failed to demonstrate any entitlement to relief. Only in cases involving criminal or collateral criminal proceedings does an incarcerated party who has been declared indigent for purposes of proceeding in the lower tribunal remain indigent. Fla. R.App. P. 9.430(b)(1)(B). As the instant proceeding is non-criminal, this presumption does not apply here.
The appellant also fails to demonstrate any error in the circuit court’s oi'der. The circuit court complied with rule 9.430 and provided reasons for its denial of the motion. The circuit court denied the motion for order of insolvency as legally insufficient based upon appellant’s failure to provide an affidavit as to economic status. Section 57.085, Florida Statutes (2005), provides that an indigent prisoner may defer prepayment of court costs and fees by filing an affidavit of indigency which contains among other things, the nature and amount of prisoner’s income as well as tangible and intangible property. As appellant did not provide this information, the circuit court properly denied the motion.
BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jachimski v. State, 162 So. 3d 302 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…ady been done — consider Ms. Jachimski’s petition for determination of indigency. If the motion is denied, the circuit court or its clerk shall enter a written order explaining its reasons for the denial. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.430; Stanley v. Berry, 933 So. 2d 1219, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (noting the circuit court’s compliance with rule 9.430 by providing written reasons for its denial of the appellant’s motion for order of insolvency); cf. Drayton v. Moore, 807 So. 2d 819, 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (reversing…