Justiniano-Nazario v. State (consolidated with Morgan v. State and Lam v. State)
The Sixth DCA granted the Public Defender's motions to enforce its earlier orders directing supplementation of the appellate record with additional trial court transcripts, after the Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit had denied the underlying transcript designations as facially insufficient. The court held that once an appellate record is docketed, Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.600(a) strips the trial court of jurisdiction to rule on matters relating to the appeal absent an appellate court's relinquishment of jurisdiction, so the Chief Judge lacked authority to deny the transcription requests.
Key facts
- Public Defender sought to enforce appellate court orders requiring the trial court to supplement the appellate record with additional trial court transcripts in three consolidated criminal appeals.
- The Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit denied the Public Defender's transcript designations as facially insufficient after the appellate record had already been docketed in the Sixth DCA.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion addresses a recurring practical problem for criminal appellate practitioners and public defenders: who has authority to rule on record-supplementation and transcript requests after the appellate record is… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.