FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _ No. 1D17-660 _ LANDON GILL, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. Angela C. Dempsey, Judge. March 28, 2018 PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. ROWE, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., concur. _ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _ Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Justin F. Karpf, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, A..

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT W.J.B., a child, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D16-3073 [August 24, 2017] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Kathleen J. Kroll, Judge; L.T. Case No. 16CJ000953AMB. Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Virginia Murphy, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant. No appearance for appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. WARNER, CIKLIN and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., con..

48 So. 3d 849 (2010) ROSATO v. STATE. No. 2D09-3927. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. November 10, 2010. DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION Affirmed.

990 So. 2d 2 (2008) James Ray DEAN, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. No. 1D08-2702. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. July 10, 2008. Rehearing Denied September 18, 2008. *3 James Ray Dean, pro se, Petitioner. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent. PER CURIAM. The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the merits. BARFIELD, WEBSTER, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

400 So. 2d 144 (1981) Sara Ann WYNN, Appellant, v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and Marilyn Ann Wynn, Appellees. No. ZZ-349. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. June 17, 1981. *145 Norton Bond, Pensacola, for appellant. John F. Windham of Beggs & Lane, Pensacola for appellee Aetna Life Insurance Co. Artice L. McGraw of Cetti & McGraw, Pensacola, for appellee Marilyn Ann Wynn. THOMPSON, Judge. On this appeal from a non-final order, the appellant argues that the trial court erred b..

754 So. 2d 146 (2000) W. Jack MASSEY, Appellant, v. Ann D. BEAGLE and James R. Beagle, Appellees. No. 1D98-4691. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. March 23, 2000. Jennifer Cates Lester, Gainesville, for Appellant. Brent G. Siegel of Brent G. Siegel, P.A., Gainesville, for Appellees. BROWNING, J. Jack Massey (Appellant) appeals the trial court's judgment against him, individually, imposed as a sanction for violation of a mediation process, and the trial court's failure to impose..

Whether Florida Administrative Code Rules 64B8-50.003(2) and 64B8-56.002(2)(a) are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority in violation of section 120.52(8), Florida Statutes (2014). Whether the following four statements are unadopted rules as defined by section 120.52(20): (i.) The Electrolysis Council is a de facto party to a petition for declaratory statement filed with the Board of Medicine concerning the practice of electrology and need not intervene in the proceeding before the Board when considering rules and statutes related to the practice of electrology; (ii.) The Electrolysis Council is a de facto party to a petition to adopt, amend, or repeal an agency rule filed with the Board of Medicine concerning the practice of electrology and need not intervene in the proceeding before the Board when the rules concern the practice of electrology; (iii.) No additional materials can be submitted to the Board of Medicine prior to the meeting of the full Board for consideration of a draft order on a petition for declaratory statement; and (iv.) The Board of Medicine will not consider any materials submitted for consideration within 48 hours of a full Board of Medicine meeting unless the Board Chair allows their distribution to the members.Petitioners demonstrated "petitions for declaratory statement" in rule 64B8-50.003(2) is an invalid rule, but did not meet burden for the challenge to other section of the rule, rule 64B8-56.002(2)(a), and four alleged unadopted rules.

Multiple open drug transactions. Bar owner took ill. Wife was inexperienced and did not have time to supervise. Policies encouraged drink solicitation.