Ricardo A. Jackson v. Breauna Lawrence

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: September 17, 2025
• Docket: 3D2025-0342
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed September 17, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________

No. 3D25-0342 Lower Tribunal No. 17-15612-FC-04 ________________

Ricardo A. Jackson, Appellant,

vs.

Breauna Lawrence, et al., Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Oscar Rodriguez-Fonts, Judge.

Ricardo A. Jackson, in proper person.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Sarah C. Prieto, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee, Florida Department of Revenue.

Before MILLER, LOBREE and GOODEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Ricardo A. Jackson appeals an order approving and ratifying

a recommended order of the general magistrate denying his supplemental petition for downward modification of support. The general magistrate

conducted an evidentiary hearing during which it heard testimony and took

evidence. But we do not have a transcript of those proceedings. To that

end, we are compelled to affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of

Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the

trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying

factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not

supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the

factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the

trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.”); Zarate v.

Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co. as Tr., 81 So. 3d 556, 557–58 (Fla. 3d DCA

2012) (“An appellant has the burden to present a record that will overcome

the presumption of the correctness of the trial court’s findings. . . . Where

there is no record of the testimony of witnesses or of evidentiary rulings, and

where a statement of the record has not been prepared pursuant to Florida

Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(a)(3). . . , a judgment which is not

fundamentally erroneous on its face must be affirmed.”).

Affirmed.