11._MORANCY_V._STATE_ _2022_AP_1_TR_ _11.13.2024

9th Cir. Ct. App. Div. | 2024-11-13
1 FLCA 7829 Ninth Judicial Circuit Court, Appellate Division (2024)

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

Morancy appeals a civil traffic infraction disposition for unlawful speed, challenging whether the evidence proved the violation beyond a reasonable doubt. The appellate court affirmed the hearing officer's decision, finding competent, substantial evidence supported the conviction and rejecting Morancy's argument that the hearing officer was required to approve his proposed statement of evidence.


Holding

The appellate court affirmed the hearing officer's decision, finding that the cited officer's testimony constituted competent, substantial evidence supporting the conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. The court rejected Morancy's argument that the hearing officer was required to approve the proposed statement of evidence, holding that approval is not a ministerial act.


Headnotes

[1] A party appealing a civil traffic infraction must provide a proper record of the proceedings to establish error.

[2] An appellate court will not reweigh evidence or substitute its factual findings for those of the lower tribunal when reviewing a decision.

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

Key Quotes

“A violation of section 316.187(2)(a), Florida Statutes, is a noncriminal traffic infraction that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Establishes the applicable standard of proof for traffic infractions

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

Morancy was issued a Florida Uniform Traffic Citation for unlawful speed violating section 316.187(2)(a). At the infraction hearing, both Morancy and …

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.

Opinion of the Court

Appellant Jean Dominique Morancy ("Morancy") appeals the disposition of a civil traffic infraction rendered by a Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officer (the "hearing officer"). This Court has jurisdiction. §318.33, Fla. Stat.; Fla. R. Traf. Ct. 6.630(d); Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(c)(l)(A). [*2] Morancy was issued a Florida Uniform Traffic Citation for unlawful speed violating section 316.187(2)(a), Florida Statutes. At the infraction hearing, Morancy and the citing officer were present. When the hearing concluded, the hearing officer withheld an adjudication ofMorancy's guilt but sentenced him to pay a $281.00 fine, pay $33.00 in court costs, and attend a four-hour traffic school within 60 days. This appeal followed. A violation of section 316.187(2)(a), Florida Statutes, is a noncriminal traffic infraction that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. §318.14(6), Fla. Stat. Morancy argues, in essence, that the disposition in his case should be reversed because the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing did not prove the violation beyond a reasonable doubt and for other various reasons. Appellee has not appeared in this case. Morancy failed to record the proceedings below pursuant to Florida Traffic Court Rule 6.460(b) and instead attempted to produce a substituted record of the proceedings via a statement of the evidence pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(5). When Appellee did not object to Morancy's proposed statement, Morancy argued that the hearing officer was required to approve the statement as a ministerial act. We disagree. See Woliner v. Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy, FSB, 49 Fla. L. Weekly D2003b (Fla. 4th DCA Oct. 2, 2024); Rivera v. Rivera, 863 So. 2d 489, 490 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004 ). The hearing officer indicated Page 2 of 4 2022 AP 000001 TR [*3] that they did not have sufficient recollection of the infraction hearing in this case to settle and approve Morancy' s proposed statement. Since the resolution ofMorancy's appeal rests on the testimony and evidence presented below and since Morancy has not presented this Court with a proper record of the proceedings, he has failed to establish error. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979). Further, even after evaluating the record of the proceedings below and including the unofficial statement of the evidence proposed by Morancy, we find that the decision below must be affirmed. From the provided unofficial statement, the hearing officer had competent, substantial evidence for their decision in the form of the citing officer's testimony. It is not the appellate court's job to reweigh the evidence and substitute its own factual findings for those of the lower tribunal. Crain & Crouse, Inc. v. Palm Bay Towers Corp., 326 So. 2d 182, 182 (Fla. 1976). We have considered the other issues raised by Morancy, and we find them to be without merit. 1 1 Morancy's successive motion for rehearing, filed on July 1, 2024, is DENIED. In addition, within that motion, Morancy seeks a referral of Judge Carsten to the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission. However, complaints about members of the judiciary and assertions of any misconduct may be filed with the Judicial Qualifications Commission at any time. There is no referral necessary. Page 3 of 4 2022 AP 000001 TR [*4] AFFIRMED. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, at Kissimmee, Osceola County, Florida, on this / 2- day of ll/-'v..,,,,.., ,7~11_ , 2024.

KEITH CARSTEN

Circuit Judge MADRIGAL, III, and EGAN, JJ., concur. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I CERTIFY that the foregoing was filed with the Clerk of the Court this \.3 day of No~ , 2024, by using the Florida Courts E-Filing Po1tal System. Accordingly, a copy of the foregoing is being served on this day to all attorney(s)/interested parties identified on the ePortal Electronic Service List via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by the ePortal System, including to JEAN DOMINIQUE MORANCY at [email protected] and to TRAFFIC COURT HEARING OFFICER at [email protected], and served via U.S. Mail to FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL - TROOP K; Attn: Trooper M.P. Marcella, P.O. Box 613070, Turkey Lake Svc. Plz., Law Enforcement Bldg. #53 18, Ocoee, FL 34761-3070. Judicial Assistant Page 4 of 4 2022 AP 00000 l TR


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw