Singletary v. State — Postconviction ruling affirmed without written analysis

Case
Tyrone T. Singletary v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Second District Court of Appeal
Judge
Khouzam; Black; Smith
Date Decided
September 23, 2026
Docket No.
2D2024-2779
Topics
Criminal Appeals; Postconviction Relief; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Tyrone T. Singletary appealed from a ruling of the Circuit Court for Pinellas County, where Judge Philip James Federico presided.

The appeal proceeded under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2), which governs certain appeals from summary postconviction proceedings. The brief opinion does not identify Singletary’s underlying claims or describe the circuit court’s reasoning.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s ruling.

The court issued a per curiam decision without explaining its reasoning. Judges Khouzam, Black, and Smith concurred.

Key Takeaways

  • The circuit court’s ruling against Singletary remains in effect.
  • The appeal arose under the procedure for certain summary postconviction appeals.
  • The appellate court provided no written analysis of the claims or grounds for affirmance.

Why It Matters

The decision resolves Singletary’s appeal in the State’s favor but establishes no articulated rule of law. Because the court did not discuss the facts, claims, or legal reasoning, the opinion offers little guidance beyond the disposition of this case.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top