FELIX PEREZ BOLADARES, APPELLANT,
v.
OLEMSHOE CORP. AND THE HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
Upon review of Appellant’s response to this court’s January 19, 2010, order to show cause, we DISMISS this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Mintz v. Broward Corr. Inst., 800 So.2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (holding order merely granting employer/carrier’s motion to dismiss not an appealable final order); Truc v. Kimmins Corp., 889 So.2d 964, 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (dismissing appeal of order granting employer/carrier’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Mintz); see also, Dedge v. Crosby, 914 So.2d 1055, 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (order granting motion to dismiss with prejudice no more final than order granting motion to dismiss without prejudice). All pending motions are dismissed as moot.
LEWIS, THOMAS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Knight v. State, 107 So. 3d 449 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…relying on Walker (the premeditation case from the Florida Supreme Court discussed in footnote 14, supra), apply the special standard anytime that the defendant’s intent is proven solely through circumstantial evidence. See, e.g., Galavis v. State, 28 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Siplin v. State, 972 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). In summary, there is a conflict and much confusion about whether the “special standard” applies only when “the evidence for each element of each offense” is wholly circumstan…1 / 2
-
State v. Sims, 110 So. 3d 113 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…to claim that he “wasn’t there,” such an assertion will not establish a reasonable hypothesis of innocence sufficient to be entitled to an acquittal, where the State produces conflicting circumstantial evidence of guilt. See, e.g., Galavis v. State, 28 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (State’s burden is to produce evidence “inconsistent with every reasonable hypothesis of innocence that the defendant proposes.”) (emphasis in original) (citing Twilegar v. State, 42 So. 3d 177 (Fla.2010)). The very authority re…
-
Green v. State, 90 So. 3d 835 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…ntrolled by the special standard generally applicable to cases “where a conviction is wholly based on circumstantial evidence.” State v. Law, 559 So. 2d 187, 188 (Fla.1989); see also Walker v. State, 957 So. 2d 560, 577 (Fla.2007); Galavis v. State, 28 So. 3d 176, 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). I am the first to admit that the line that distinguishes direct evidence from circumstantial evidence is sometimes not intuitive to me. Moreover, it is not always easy for me to decide whether a conviction or an element of…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mintz v. Broward Corr. Inst. & State of Fla., 800 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Wilson v. State, 800 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Dep't OF Child. & Families v. In the Interest of L. R., 914 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Floyd v. Burnham, 889 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Wilton Dedge v. Crosby, 914 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)