THOMAS BART BRENNAN
v.
ZOUBAIR BENNANI

Fla. 1st DCA | 2024-04-17
No. 2022-3944
2024 FL 4279 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2024) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.


Holding

More than one act is required to constitute stalking under Florida Statutes section 784.048(1)(b), but the victim need not be stalked repeatedly to meet the statutory definition.


Headnotes

[1] Under Florida Statutes section 784.048(1)(b), stalking requires more than one act constituting a course of conduct, but the victim need not be stalked repeatedly to satis…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Thomas Bart Brennan appealed a circuit court judgment in a stalking case involving defendant Zoubair Bennani in Walton County.…

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.

Opinion of the Court

April 17, 2024 PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Klein v. Manville, 363 So. 3d 1163, 1168–69 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023); Pickett v. Copeland, 236 So. 3d 1142, 1144– 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (holding that more than one act is required to constitute a course of conduct under the definition of stalking in section 784.048(1)(b), Florida Statutes, but the victim does not have to be stalked repeatedly to meet the statutory definition).

LEWIS, BILBREY, and LONG, JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …l court that it was indeed an issue of law. Thus, Universal neither objected nor tried to correct the trial court's understanding of the issue. Having failed to do so, it did not preserve this contention for our review. See, e.g., Klein v. Manville, 363 So. 3d 1163, 1170 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023) ("[T]o preserve an issue for appeal, the issue ‘must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or grounds to be argued on appeal must be part of that presentation." (quoting Bryant v. State, 901 So. 2d…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw