13 judges and lawyers vie for key Florida appellate court seat
Thirteen Florida attorneys and judges have applied for a vacancy on the state's 1st District Court of Appeal in Tallahassee, according to the court's judicial nominating commission.
The applicants are vying to take the place of Judge Brad Thomas, an appointee of Gov. Jeb Bush who was on the court since 2005 and retired as of Feb. 28.
It's a plum judicial spot: The 1st DCA is one of the more high-profile courts in the state. It's headquartered in the capital and often hears appeals in cases involving the governor and state government.
Overall, it handles civil and criminal appeals from five judicial circuits across north Florida.
The list of applicants released Wednesday includes:
Francis A. Carbone II, general counsel for the Florida Agency for Persons with Disabilities in Tallahassee.
Amie E. DeGuzman, a Jacksonville-based workers' compensation attorney.
Stephen S. Everett, a circuit judge in Tallahassee and the first ever to be appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Brittany O. Finkbeiner, an administrative law judge in Tallahassee.
Jennifer J. Frydrychowicz, a circuit judge in Pensacola.
R. Todd Harris, a circuit judge in Pensacola.
Joshua M. Hawkes, a circuit judge in Tallahassee.
William S. Henry, a circuit judge in Panama City.
Timothy J. Inacio, an attorney in private practice in Cantonment.
Lance E. Neff, a circuit judge in Tallahassee and a former general counsel for the Florida Department of Corrections.
Kyle B. Sill, a judicial law clerk for the 1st DCA.
Ray Treadwell, a partner in the Lawson Huck Gonzalez law firm of Tallahassee and a former chief deputy general counsel for DeSantis.
George M. Wright, a circuit judge in Gainesville.
Also, the commission selected Nathan Adams of the Holland & Knight law firm in Tallahassee as its chair and Amber Nunnally, a partner in the Tallahassee office of Shutts & Bowen, as vice-chair.
The commission will interview candidates on Thursday, April 3. Interviews will be held at the 1st District's courthouse, Room 3360, 2000 Drayton Drive, Tallahassee.
The interview schedule will be released "at a later date."
According to The Florida Bar, "Appellate judges in Florida have the same selection and retention process as Supreme Court justices. They are appointed by the governor after being screened by judicial nominating commissions (JNCs). They face their first retention votes within two years and thereafter, if retained, every six years."
According to the governor's office, "Applicants interview with the JNC, which then determines by majority vote which applicants to recommend to the governor for consideration. The JNC has no more than 60 days from the time it is requested to convene to nominate no fewer than three and no more than six applicants to the Governor.
"The governor (then) has 60 days to appoint a judge from among the nominees."
Jim Rosica is a member of the USA TODAY Network's Florida Capital Bureau. He can be reached at jrosica@tallahassee.com. Follow him on X: @JimRosicaFL.
This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Florida's 1st DCA vacancy draws top legal contenders
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fewer than 1 in 4 Colorado voters support Medicaid cuts
(Stock photo by) Just 21% of Colorado voters want Congress to decrease Medicaid spending, according to a poll released Tuesday. Concerns about gutted health care access come as U.S. Senate Republican leaders work to push through a tax and spending bill that would cut Medicaid by an estimated $625 billion over the next decade. The poll zeroed in on the 8th Congressional District, which includes the northern Denver metro area and parts of Weld County. In the district, where 1 in 4 residents receive Medicaid benefits, 63% of voters said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who voted to cut Medicaid. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The 8th District is represented by Republican Gabe Evans, who voted in favor of the plan that would reduce federal Medicaid spending when it was brought to the U.S. House of Representatives in May. A spokesperson for Evans defended the vote, saying a proposed provision to institute part-time work requirements for some people to retain Medicaid eligibility would make 'the program more efficient by cutting out fraud, waste, and abuse.' 'Congressman Gabe Evans has been steadfast in his support of protecting Medicaid for the vulnerable populations it was created to serve — pregnant women, kids, and disabled people,' said spokesperson Delanie Bomar in a statement Tuesday. Evans, who was elected to the House last year, represents one of the country's few congressional swing districts. According to the poll, 42% of voters in the district want to see increased federal Medicaid spending, 20% want it to stay about the same and 28% want it to decrease. Medicaid, the state-federal health care program for lower-income people and some with disabilities, serves more than 70 million U.S. residents. The poll of 675 registered Colorado voters was conducted by Broomfield-based firm Magellan Strategies on behalf of the nonprofit Healthier Colorado. It has a margin of error of 3.7%. 'Politicians are saying that they want to cut Medicaid to make it better, but the poll shows clearly that voters aren't buying what they're selling,' said Jake Williams, CEO of Healthier Colorado. 'It shows that there's real political peril for any candidate who votes to cut Medicaid.' Bomar pointed to the poll's findings that many respondents, especially those who are Republicans or unaffiliated, said Medicaid 'should only be for U.S. citizens or legal residents, with some calling for stricter eligibility enforcement.' Immigrants who are in the U.S. unlawfully are not eligible for federal Medicaid benefits, but Colorado and 13 other states provide some state-funded coverage to immigrants lacking permanent legal status. Under the proposed federal cuts, an estimated 7.8 million people, most of them citizens or lawful residents, would lose access to Medicaid, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Some of the main reasons cited in the poll by respondents who said they have favorable opinions of Medicaid are the benefits it provides to low-income Coloradans, seniors, children, people with disabilities and single parents. 'The poll shows that Medicaid cuts would have devastating effects for both our health and economy here in Colorado,' Williams said. 'I also think it shows that Colorado voters aren't dummies.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SBC reassert opposition to LGBTQ+ rights, seek repeal of historic same-sex marriage ruling
DALLAS − The Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution supporting a concerted effort to reverse Obergefell v. Hodges as the historic U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage approaches its 10-year anniversary. The June 10 vote by the nation's largest Protestant denomination at its annual legislative assembly in Dallas is another step in the evangelical Christian group's focus on opposing LGBTQ+ rights. That intensified focus is a shift from abortion, which was long the fixation of SBC resolutions prior to the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The 2022 overturning of Roe emboldened many within the Nashville-based SBC to then hope for the same with the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage. Resolutions are non-binding statements expressing the convention's views on social and cultural issues. Other resolutions at past SBC annual meetings have reasserted Southern Baptist opposition to LGBTQ+ rights, though this year's resolution was the most forceful articulation of their rebuke of the Supreme Court precedent protecting same-sex marriage. 'Legal rulings like Obergefell v. Hodges and policies that deny the biological reality of male and female are legal fictions, undermine the truth of God's design, and lead to social confusion and injustice,' the resolution said. Southern Baptist delegates, called messengers, overwhelmingly approved the measure. Whether the latest vote will move the needle on gay marriage remains to be seen. Last year, the SBC passed a resolution condemning the use of in-vitro fertilization, only to see President Donald Trump sign an executive order earlier this year seeking to protect IVF access and reduce its out-of-pocket and health plan costs. Reversing the Obergefell ruling is one of numerous issues related to sex, gender and marriage encompassed by the resolution. Among other things, the resolution affirms that there are only two genders, defines marriage as between a man and a woman, says families are designed for procreation and that human life is sacred 'from conception to natural death.' A strongly traditionalist voice in the SBC, Denny Burk, proposed the language in the resolution that messengers ultimately approved. Burk is the president of Louisville-based Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, an advocacy group that was behind two well-known, cross-evangelical statements opposing LGBTQ+ rights. The first statement was the Danvers Statement in 1987 and the second was the Nashville Statement in 2017. 'It is sinful to approve of homosexual immorality or transgenderism and that such approval constitutes an essential departure from Christian faithfulness and witness,' the Nashville Statement said, which stirred widespread local controversy upon ratification. 'Approval of homosexual immorality or transgenderism is a matter of moral indifference about which otherwise faithful Christians should agree to disagree.' The new resolution approved by the SBC is another iteration of the Nashville Statement, but more forcefully attacks the U.S. jurisprudence protecting the LGBTQ+ rights that evangelicals oppose. Liam Adams covers religion for The Tennessean, part of the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at ladams@ or on social media @liamsadams. This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Southern Baptists call for repeal of historic same-sex marriage ruling
Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
The Justice Department wants to end an agreement it reached with a Pa. bank it accused of redlining in Philly
Two years ago, the U.S. Department of Justice accused a Pennsylvania bank of redlining - avoiding lending in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in and around Philadelphia. ESSA Bank & Trust, based in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, denied the accusations but entered into a settlement agreement with the federal government in which the bank had to give more than $2.9 million in loan subsidies to homebuyers in formerly redlined communities. The bank also agreed to devote resources to soliciting mortgage applications from Philadelphia residents in neighborhoods it was accused of ignoring, to include Philadelphians in its program for low- and moderate-income homebuyers, to work with local groups to provide homebuyer education, and to target historically excluded neighborhoods with its advertising. On Friday, the Justice Department asked the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to allow it to end the five-year agreement three years early. The court filing is in line with other recent Justice Department moves across the country to end similar fair-housing and antidiscrimination settlement agreements. Lisa Rice, president and CEO of the National Fair Housing Alliance, said in a statement that by taking these actions, "this administration is empowering bad actors and leaving millions of our nation's most vulnerable unprotected and exposed." The Justice Department said in its motion Friday that ESSA Bank "has demonstrated a commitment to remediation," including disbursing required loan subsidies, and is "substantially in compliance" with other terms of the court order. The bank did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday. The department noted that its motion was "unopposed." But on Monday, the National Fair Housing Alliance and local civil rights organizations filed a motion asking to join the case and opposing cutting short the legal agreement. "This effort would strip West and Southwest Philadelphia communities of the hard-won protections they were promised just two years ago," Rachel Wentworth, executive director of the nonprofit Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania, said in a statement. "For decades, banks of all kinds have used redlining to deny neighborhoods of color access to wealth and opportunity, and ending this consent order sends a devastating message to these communities." The Philadelphia-based Public Interest Law Center and the law firm Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC, which has offices in Philadelphia and Marlton, are representing the Housing Equality Center, the National Fair Housing Alliance, and POWER Interfaith, the Pennsylvania faith-based community organizing network, as they oppose the Justice Department's motion to end the agreement. Eli Segal of Stapleton Segal Cochran said in a statement that "the rule of law demands more here than vague assurances of 'substantial compliance.' It demands court-ordered action." Olivia Mania, attorney and Penn Carey Law Catalyst Fellow at the Public Interest Law Center, said in an interview that "communities in and around Philadelphia deserve access to a lending market that's free from discrimination." "This isn't just about one bank," Mania said in a statement. "It's about whether the federal government will honor its role in dismantling structural racism in the housing market - or walk away when the cameras are off. The parties should be held to the terms of the consent order to ensure real, lasting change." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
