DARRYL WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
NANCY LEBEAU, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Darryl Williams appeals an injunction for protection entered against him. We reverse.
Because of a technical problem with the trial court’s digital recording equipment, a significant portion of the evidence was not recorded. As a result, through no fault of the parties, the transcript of the proceedings is incomplete. Unfortunately, the missing portions of the transcript are nee- essary for a complete review of the issues raised on appeal.1 As a result, we have no alternative but to remand this matter for a new hearing. See Jones v. State, 780 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PLEUS, ORFINGER and EVANDER, JJ., concur. . The parties were unable to agree on a statement of the evidence, as authorized by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(4). Additionally, the trial judge was unable to recollect the evidence.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
S.R.J. v. State, 997 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…o support the Appellant’s adjudications. [*499] With no ability to review any portion of the adjudicatory proceeding on appeal, no meaningful appellate review can occur in this case. See Delap v. State, 350 So. 2d 462 (Fla.1977); Williams v. Lebeau, 988 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); L.I.B. v. State, 811 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Therefore, we reverse and remand with directions that the trial court conduct a de novo violation of probation hearing. REVERSED and REMANDED. TORPY, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ…
Authorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 780 So. 2d 218 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)