Arminan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 13, 2016·No. 16-0381·Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed April 13, 2016.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D16-381

Lower Tribunal No. 03-9926C

Jiskly Arminan,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Daryl E. Trawick and Marisa Tinkler Mendez, Judges.

Jiskly Arminan, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before ROTHENBERG, LAGOA and SALTER, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed, with the clarification that the prohibition in the decretal part of the trial court’s denial order, “Defendant is hereby PROHIBITED from filing any further motions without representation by a licensed member of the Florida Bar,” is limited to the case in which that Order was entered, namely State v. Arminan, Case No. F03-9926C, Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit for Miami- Dade County, Florida.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arminan v. State, (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Arminan v. State (Arminan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.