SHAYONNE PETERSON
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,
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 district court of appeal lacks statutory authority to directly review a hearing officer's order issued in connection with a federal program, and an agency's administrative rule cannot supply the basis for vesting such jurisdiction.
[1] An agency's administrative rule cannot supply the basis for vesting appellate jurisdiction in a district court of appeal where no statute authorizes review of a hearing o…
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 intelligence“There is no statutory authorization for our direct review of the hearing officer's order issued in connection with this federal program, so we lack appellate jurisdiction in this case.”
Court's explanation for lack of jurisdiction
Shayonne Peterson filed an administrative appeal with the Department of Children and Families challenging a written notification of case action regard…
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 Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D2024-1568 _____________________________
SHAYONNE PETERSON,
Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,
Appellee. _____________________________
On appeal from the Department of Children and Families. June Jones, Hearing Officer.
September 24, 2025
PER CURIAM.
This appeal involves an order issued by a hearing officer from within the Department of Children and Families. The order dismissed Shayonne Peterson’s administrative appeal as untimely filed, the appeal having been filed beyond the ninety-day period established by the Department for challenging a written notification of case action due to an overpayment of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. There is no statutory authorization for our direct review of the hearing officer’s order issued in connection with this federal program, so we lack appellate jurisdiction in this case. Cf. Ninja Acad., Inc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Agric. & Consumer Servs., Div. of Food, Nutrition, & Wellness, No. 1D2022-1139, 2025 WL 2233403, at *1–2 (Fla. 1st DCA Aug.
2 6, 2025) (determining there was no general law authorizing review of a hearing officer’s order issued under a federal program and holding that an agency’s administrative rule cannot supply the basis for vesting jurisdiction in the district court). We in turn treat this appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari and transfer the case to the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.040(b)(1), (c); Ninja Acad., Inc., 2025 WL 2233403, at *2–3 (treating the appeal as a certiorari petition and transferring it to the circuit court in the absence of a “statutorily authorized pathway . . . to obtain first-tier review of the hearing officer’s order in the district court”).
TRANSFERRED.
LEWIS, WINOKUR, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
Shayonne Peterson, pro se, Appellant.
Andrew McGinley, General Counsel, Department of Children and Families, Tallahassee, for Appellee.