STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
DEVON STEVEN BARNES
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 state's appeal was affirmed because the state failed to present its specific legal arguments to the lower court, and therefore those arguments were not preserved for appellate review.
[1] An issue is not preserved for appellate review unless the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal is presented to the trial court.
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“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”
Citation to Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (Fla. 1985), establishing the preservation requirement for appellate review.
This is a criminal case involving Devon Steven Barnes in Orange County. The trial court ruled in favor of the defendant.…
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 Fourth Amendment (Search And Seizure) cases and more on FLexlaw
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 6D2025-0522 Lower Tribunal No. 2022-CF-008094
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellant, v. DEVON STEVEN BARNES, Appellee.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County. Kevin B. Weiss, Judge.
August 14, 2026
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (Fla. 1985) (“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”); United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 923 (1984) (“Finally, depending on the circumstances of the particular case, a warrant may be so facially deficient—i.e., in failing to particularize the place to be searched or the things to be seized that the executing officers cannot reasonably presume it to be valid.").
WOZNIAK, MIZE and PRATT, JJ., concur.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Richard A. Pallas, Jr., and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorneys General, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Blair Allen, Public Defender, and Ronald N. Toward, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellee.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984)
- Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1985)