DOMINICK HARRIS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2025-05-21
No. 2024-1703
403 So. 3d 354 2025 FL 4289 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2025) Caution
Cited by 1 case

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Dominick Harris appealed an order granting his motion to amend his 1997 conviction judgment to add his missing social security number as required by Florida law. The court dismissed the appeal because the trial court's order fully granted Harris's requested relief, making it non-adverse and thus not appealable.


Holding

A defendant cannot appeal an order that is not adverse to him. Because the trial court fully granted Harris's requested relief, the order was favorable to Harris and therefore not appealable.


Headnotes

[1] An appeal will be dismissed when the order sought to be reviewed is not adverse to the appellant.

[2] A procedural error in a judgment, such as the omission of a social security number or the failure to affix fingerprints, does not render the judgment void.

Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“Because the order was not adverse to him, we hereby dismiss the appeal.”

Establishes the primary holding that a party cannot appeal an order favorable to their interests.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Harris was convicted by jury in 1997 of kidnapping, sexual battery, robbery, and carjacking while armed, and was sentenced to life imprisonment. His w…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Per_curiam
Per Curiam

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed May 21, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D24-1703 Lower Tribunal No. F96-032173

Dominick Harris, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michelle Delancy, Judge.

Dominick Harris, in proper person.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Haccord J. Curry, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

After a jury trial in 1997, appellant Dominick Harris was found and adjudicated guilty of kidnapping, sexual battery, robbery and carjacking, all while armed, and sentenced to a term of life. While his written judgment form contained an impression of his fingerprints, Harris' social security number was omitted from the judgment. Twenty-six years later, Harris filed a motion to amend his written judgment, contending that section 921.241(4), Florida Statutes (1997), required that the defendant's social security number be affixed in open court to every written judgment of guilty of a felony, or the reason for its absence be indicated. The State did not oppose this motion and the trial court entered a written order granting the relief requested. Nevertheless, Harris filed an appeal with this court seeking review of the order fully granting his requested relief. Because the order was not adverse to him, we hereby dismiss the appeal. See Booker v. State, 400 So. 3d 716, 717 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024) (first citing Credit Indus. Co. v. Remark Chem. Co., 67 So. 2d 540, 541 (Fla. 1953); and then citing Earl v. State, 276 So. 3d 359, 361 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019), approved, 314 So. 3d 1253 (Fla. 2021)).1

Dismissed.

Footnotes
1 For the first time on appeal, Harris contends that this procedural error required that the judgment be entered in his presence, alleging that without this the judgment is void. We find no merit in this claim. See Wilson v. State, 333 So. 3d 312, 313 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (citing Jones v. State, 569 So. 2d 1234, 1238 (Fla. 1990) (finding “no merit" to claim for relief based on trial judge's failure to affix defendant's fingerprints to judgment of guilt as required by section 921.241)); Nevels v. State, 6 So. 3d 117 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (citing Ramos v. State, 429 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981) (affirming conviction and sentence, but vacating judgment without fingerprints affixed and remanding for entry of formal judgment)).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw