IN THE INTEREST OF: T.L., A MINOR CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
T.L., a minor, appealed an extension of time granted for assessment and stabilization under Florida's Alcohol and Other Drug Services Act. The appellate court dismissed the appeal as moot, finding that while the issues were capable of repetition, the appellant failed to demonstrate they would evade appellate review through other available remedies.
The court dismissed the appeal as moot. Although the issues were capable of repetition, the appellant failed to demonstrate that appellate review would be unavailable through habeas corpus, mandamus, or certiorari if the issues were to recur, and therefore the mootness doctrine applied. The court also noted that several issues were not preserved for appellate review.
[1] An appeal may be dismissed as moot when the issues raised have become academic and no practical relief can be afforded.
[2] For an issue capable of repetition yet evading review to avoid dismissal as moot, the appellant must demonstrate with specificity how the particular facts of the case are…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“We agree that the issues are capable of repetition, but decline to address the merits as we conclude that the appellant has failed to demonstrate that the issues raised, if repeated, are likely to evade appellate review.”
Establishes the court's two-part test for the mootness exception: issues must both be capable of repetition and likely to evade review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceT.L., a minor child, was subject to proceedings under the Hal S. Marchman Alcohol and Other Drug Services Act. A lower court granted an extension of t…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Capable Of Repetition Yet Evading Review cases and more on FLexlaw
T.L., a minor, appeals the extension of time granted to complete his assessment and stabilization under the Hal S. March-man Alcohol and Other Drug Services Act, section 397.301, Florida Statutes (2009), and other issues related to the hearing where the extension was granted. We dismiss T.L.’s appeal, as the issues raised are moot and/or were not preserved for appellate review.
The appellant concedes that the points raised on appeal are moot, but opposes dismissal arguing that the issues are likely to recur yet evade appellate review. We agree that the issues are capable of repetition, but decline to address the merits as we conclude that the appellant has failed to demonstrate that the issues raised, if repeated, are likely to evade appellate review. See N.W. v. State, 767 So.2d 446, 447 (Fla.2000) (declining to dismiss as moot where the controversy raised in the case, which was on review before the court upon a certified conflict, was capable of repetition, yet evading review); L.W.T. v. A.W., 770 So.2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (dismissing appeal as moot where appellant failed to describe with specificity the questions of great public importance or how the particular facts of the case were likely to recur and yet evade appellate review). The appellant did not address or explain why appellate review by habeas corpus, mandamus, or certiorari would not be available if the issues raised and properly preserved were to re-occur. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot. Additionally, although we are dismissing the appeal as moot, we note that several issues raised on appeal were not preserved for appellate review.
Appeal dismissed as moot.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Desroses v. State, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D298 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)…l on the basis of mootness.2 See Godwin v. State, 593 So. 2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1992) (“An issue is moot when the controversy has been so fully resolved that a judicial determination can have no actual effect.” (citation omitted)); In re T.L. v. State, 35 So. 3d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (dismissing appeal as moot); Philip J. Padovano, 2 Fla. Prac., Appellate Practice § 1:4 (2019 ed.) (“An appellate proceeding is subject to dismissal if the issues have become moot.”). Appeal dismissed as moot. 1 After filing the…
Authorities Cited
- N.W. v. State, 767 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 2000)
- L.W.T. v. A.W., 770 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)