Traficante v. Lambert
This text of 275 So. 3d 794 (Traficante v. Lambert) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed. See § 784.046, Fla. Stat. (2018) (action by victim of repeat violence; defining "violence" to include assault, and "repeat violence" to mean two incidents of violence committed by the respondent, one of which must have been within six months of the filing of the petition); Levy v. Jacobs,
In the trial court, the appellee/petitioner was represented by counsel, testified to the first and second incidents of violence (May 27, 2018, and April 8, 2018), and provided corroborative evidence through the testimony of a law enforcement officer and photographic evidence. The second incident *795indisputably occurred less than six months prior to the filing of the petition. The respondent, who is the appellant here, was not represented by counsel in the trial court and provided no evidence beyond his own denial.
In this Court, the appellee/petitioner is not represented by counsel and has not filed a brief or memorandum of points and authorities. Nonetheless, the appellant has failed to demonstrate legal error, and the record provides competent, substantial evidence supporting the final judgment of injunction for protection against repeat violence (after notice).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
275 So. 3d 794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/traficante-v-lambert-fladistctapp-2019.