In Re: Amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure

• Court: Supreme Court of Florida
• Decided: March 6, 2025
• Docket: SC2024-0317
• Status: Published

Opinion

Supreme Court of Florida ____________

No. SC2024-0317 ____________

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE.

March 6, 2025

PER CURIAM.

The Florida Bar’s Appellate Court Rules Committee has filed a

report proposing amendments to Florida Rules of Appellate

Procedure 9.110 (Appeal Proceedings to Review Final Orders of

Lower Tribunals and Orders Granting New Trial in Jury and

Nonjury Cases), 9.130 (Proceedings to Review Nonfinal Orders and

Specified Final Orders), 9.140 (Appeal Proceedings in Criminal

Cases), and 9.800 (Uniform Citation System). 1

The Committee approved the amendments by votes of 33-0-0

as to rule 9.110, 28-6-0 as to rule 9.130, 26-6-0 as to rule 9.140,

and 35-0-0 as to rule 9.800. The Florida Bar’s Board of Governors

1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.; see also Fla. R. Gen. Prac. & Jud. Admin. 2.140(b)(1). unanimously recommends adopting the proposed amendments.

When we published the Committee’s proposal for comment, the

Florida Public Defender Association filed a comment expressing

opposition to the proposed changes to rule 9.140. Later, in

response to an order seeking additional comments, the Florida

Defense Lawyers Association filed a comment expressing support

for the proposed changes to rule 9.130. The Committee filed

responses to both comments.

Now, in consideration of the Committee’s report, the

comments received, the Committee’s responses to those comments,

and the oral argument held on December 12, 2024, we hereby

amend rules 9.110, 9.130, and 9.800 in the manner proposed by

the Committee. However, we decline to adopt the Committee’s

proposed amendments to rule 9.140. The more significant changes

are as follows.

First, rule 9.110(b) is amended to replace an obsolete reference

to rule 9.180(c)(3) with a reference to subdivision (c)(2). This

change corrects a reference to a deleted subdivision number.

Next, a new subdivision (a)(3)(F)(iv) is created under rule

9.130. Rule 9.130(a)(3) lists nonfinal orders that may be appealed

-2- in civil proceedings. New subdivision (a)(3)(F)(iv) adds an entry to

that list, allowing civil defendants to appeal nonfinal orders that

deny claims of immunity brought under section 776.032, Florida

Statutes (2024), known as Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. Minor

editorial changes are also made to rule 9.130 to conform with our

pronouncements in In re Guidelines for Rules Submissions, Florida

Administrative Order No. AOSC22-78 (Fla. Oct. 24, 2022).

Finally, rule 9.800(d)(4) is amended to replace obsolete

references to administrative law reporters with more current

references.

As for rule 9.140, as stated above, we decline to adopt the

Committee’s proposed amendments to this rule. The Committee

proposed giving criminal defendants a new procedural path to

challenge nonfinal orders denying claims of Stand Your Ground

immunity in the context of criminal proceedings. But in contrast to

civil proceedings, in which interlocutory appeals are available for a

broad range of nonfinal orders (as listed in rule 9.130(a)(3)), there

are very few circumstances where interlocutory appeals are

authorized in criminal proceedings, and notably, those narrow

-3- circumstances do not include challenges against nonfinal orders

denying statutory immunity.

Both the Florida Public Defender Association and the minority

of voting Committee members expressed concern that allowing

interlocutory appeals from this one specific type of nonfinal order

would present unique problems in the context of criminal

proceedings. As the Committee acknowledges, the proposed

amendments to rule 9.140 would create a first-of-its-kind rule for

criminal defendants—a rule that would, at the very least, create

internal tension with other procedures in the ruleset. We therefore

decline to adopt the proposed changes to rule 9.140.

We do not suggest that a criminal defendant who hopes to

challenge a nonfinal order denying a claim of Stand Your Ground

immunity will have no avenue for relief. We have stated previously

that the constitutional writ of prohibition may be invoked in such

circumstances. See Boston v. State, 326 So. 3d 673, 677 (Fla.

2021) (declaring that “a defendant who avails him or herself to a

pretrial immunity hearing and who believes legal error was

committed at the pretrial immunity hearing may still seek relief by

filing a petition for a writ of prohibition before invoking his or her

-4- right to a trial”) (emphasis omitted) (footnote omitted). We reiterate

the availability of that remedy now.

Accordingly, the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure are

hereby amended as reflected in the appendix to this opinion. New

language is indicated with underscoring; deleted language is

indicated with struck-through type. The amendments will become

effective July 1, 2025, at 12:01 a.m.

It is so ordered.

MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, LABARGA, COURIEL, GROSSHANS, FRANCIS, and SASSO, JJ., concur.

THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS.

Original Proceeding – Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure

Christine Riley Davis, Chair, Appellate Court Rules Committee, St. Petersburg, Florida, Joshua E. Doyle, Executive Director, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida, Heather Savage Telfer, Staff Liaison, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida, and Chance Lyman of Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC, on behalf of the Appellate Court Rules Committee, Tampa, Florida,

for Petitioner

Stacy Ann Scott, President, Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., Gainesville, Florida, Carlos J. Martinez, Past President, Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., Miami, Florida, and John Eddy Morrison, Assistant Public Defender, Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida, on behalf of the Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., Miami, Florida; and Elaine D. Walter of Boyd Richards Parker

-5- Colonnelli, P.L., on behalf of the Florida Defense Lawyers Association, Miami, Florida,

Responding with comments

-6- APPENDIX

RULE 9.110. APPEAL PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW FINAL ORDERS OF LOWER TRIBUNALS AND ORDERS GRANTING NEW TRIAL IN JURY AND NONJURY CASES

(a) [No Change]

(b) Commencement. Jurisdiction of the court under this rule must be invoked by filing a notice with the clerk of the lower tribunal within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed, except as provided in rule 9.140(c)(32).

(c) – (m) [No Change]

Committee Notes [No Change]

Court Commentary [No Change]

RULE 9.130. PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW NONFINAL ORDERS AND SPECIFIED FINAL ORDERS (a) Applicability.

(1) This rule applies to appeals to the district courts of appeal of the nonfinal orders authorized herein and to appeals to the circuit court of nonfinal orders when provided by general law. Review of other nonfinal orders in such courts and nonfinal administrative action shall beis by the method prescribed by rule 9.100.

(2) Appeals of nonfinal orders in criminal cases shall be asare prescribed by rule 9.140.

-7- (3) Appeals to the district courts of appeal of nonfinal orders are limited to those that:

(A) – (B) [No Change]

(C) determine:

(i) – (ix) [No Change]

(x) that a permanent guardianship shall beis established for a dependent child pursuant tounder section 39.6221, Florida Statutes;

(D) – (E) [No Change]

(F) deny a motion that:

(i) [No Change]

(ii) asserts entitlement to immunity under section 768.28(9), Florida Statutes; or

(iii) asserts entitlement to sovereign immunity; or

(iv) asserts entitlement to immunity under section 776.032, Florida Statutes;

(G) – (I) [No Change]

(4) [No Change]

(5) Orders entered on an authorized and timely motion for relief from judgment are reviewable by the method prescribed by this rule. Motions for rehearing directed to these orders are not authorized under these rules and therefore will not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal.

(b) Commencement. Jurisdiction of the court under subdivisions (a)(3)–(a)(5) of this rule shall beis invoked by filing a

-8- notice with the clerk of the lower tribunal within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed.

(c) Notice. The notice, designated as a notice of appeal of nonfinal order, shallmust be substantially in the form prescribed by rule 9.900(c). Except in criminal cases, a conformed copy of the order or orders designated in the notice of appeal shallmust be attached to the notice. The notice must be accompanied by any required filing fee except as provided in rule 9.430 for proceedings by indigents.

(d) Record. A record shallwill not be transmitted to the court unless ordered.

(e) Briefs. The appellant’s initial brief, accompanied by an appendix as prescribed by rule 9.220, shallmust be served within 20 days of filing the notice. Additional briefs shallmust be served as prescribed by rule 9.210.

(f) [No Change]

(g) Cross-Appeal. An appellee may cross-appeal the order or orders designated by the appellant, to review any ruling described in subdivisions (a)(3)–(a)(5), by serving a notice within 15 days of service of the appellant’s timely filed notice of appeal or within the time prescribed for filing a notice of appeal, whichever is later. A notice of cross-appeal shallmust be filed either before service or immediately thereafter in the same manner as the notice of appeal. The notice of cross-appeal must be accompanied by any required filing fee except as provided in rule 9.430 for proceedings by indigents.

(h) Review on Full Appeal. This rule shallwill not preclude initial review of a nonfinal order on appeal from the final order in the cause.

-9- RULE 9.800. UNIFORM CITATION SYSTEM This rule applies to all legal documents, including court opinions. Except for citations to case reporters, all citation forms should be spelled out in full if used as an integral part of a sentence either in the text or in footnotes. Abbreviated forms as shown in this rule should be used if the citation is intended to stand alone either in the text or in footnotes.

(a) – (c) [No Change]

(d) Florida Administrative Agencies.

(1) – (3) [No Change]

(4) Decisions that are not available online may be cited to an administrative law reporter as follows if published therein:

(A) Florida Administrative Law Reports: Dep’t of Health v. Sabates, 34 F.A.L.R. 2378 (Fla. Bd. of Med. 2011);

(B) Florida Career Service Reporter:.

(i) Before July 1998: Carroll v. Dep’t of Corr., 12 F.C.S.R. ¶ 044 (Fla. Pub. Emps. Rel. Comm’n 1997);

(ii) July 1998–June 2015: Arenas v. Dep’t of Corr., 25 F.C.S.R. 309 (Fla. Pub. Emps. Rel. Comm’n 2010);

(C) Environmental and Land Use Administrative Law Reporter: In re Riverview Pointe, Manatee Cty., 2013 E.R. F.A.L.R. 50 at 2 (Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot. 2012);

(D) Florida Department of Revenue Tax Reporter: Technical Ass’t Advm’t 09A-049, 2009 Tax F.A.L.R. 431 (Fla. Dep’t of Rev. 2009);

(EB) Florida Public Employee Reporter: Delgado v. Sch. Dist. of Broward Cty., 36 F.P.E.R. 207 (Fla. Pub. Emp. Rel. Comm’n Gen. Counsel 2010)United Faculty of Fla. v. Fla. Gulf Coast Univ., 29 F.P.E.R. ¶ 120 (Fla. Pub. Emps. Rel. Comm’n 2003);

- 10 - (FC) Florida Public Service Commission Reporter: In re Nuclear Cost Recovery Clause, 2013 F.P.S.C. 10:149 (Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm’n 2013) for decisions published from 1981–2009.;

(G) Florida Compensation Reports: Whitney v. Mercy Hosp., 9 F.C.R. 373 (Fla. Indus. Rel. Comm’n 1976);

(H) Florida Division of Administrative Hearings Reports: Fla. Real Estate Comm’n v. Warrington, 39 F.D.O.A.H. 747 (Fla. Real Estate Comm’n 1977);

(I) Florida Administrative Reporter: Cockrell v. Comptroller, 12 F.A.R. 192 (Fla. Comptroller 1979).

(e) – (q) [No Change]

- 11 -