Rafael Toirac-Aguilera v. City of Miami

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 22, 2025
Docket3D2025-1896
StatusPublished

This text of Rafael Toirac-Aguilera v. City of Miami (Rafael Toirac-Aguilera v. City of Miami) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rafael Toirac-Aguilera v. City of Miami, (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed October 22, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D25-1896 Lower Tribunal No. F09-40479 ________________

Rafael Toirac-Aguilera, Petitioner,

vs.

City of Miami, Respondent.

A Case of Original Jurisdiction—Mandamus.

Rafael Toirac-Aguilera, in proper person.

George K. Wysong, III, City Attorney, for respondent.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ.

MILLER, J. Petitioner, Rafael Toirac-Aguilera, an incarcerated prisoner, seeks a

writ of mandamus directing respondent, City of Miami, to produce the

investigative records that precipitated his arrest and later conviction for first-

degree murder, in violation of sections 782.04(1) and 775.087, Florida

Statutes (2009). For the reasons below, we deny the petition.

Toirac-Aguilera forwarded multiple requests to the Miami-Dade Police

Department seeking the production of materials under Florida’s Public

Records Act, codified in chapter 119, Florida Statutes (2024). Miami-Dade

responded to the requests, stating that the case number provided involved

records maintained by City of Miami. Although Miami-Dade provided Toirac-

Aguilera with the relevant contact information, there is no record showing

any request propounded on City of Miami.

It is axiomatic that mandamus is the proper vehicle for compelling an

official or agency to perform a lawful duty. See Anthony v. State, 277 So. 3d

223, 225 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019). A petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus must

demonstrate “a clear legal right to performance of the act requested, an

indisputable legal duty, and no adequate remedy at law.” Stern v. City of

Miami Beach, 359 So. 3d 1209, 1211 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (citing Smith v.

State, 696 So. 2d 814, 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)). In the instant case, Toirac-

2 Aguilera has failed to make the requisite showing for this remedy as he must

first request the records from the proper agency.

Petition dismissed.

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

Related

Smith v. State
696 So. 2d 814 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rafael Toirac-Aguilera v. City of Miami, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rafael-toirac-aguilera-v-city-of-miami-fladistctapp-2025.