Florida 2nd DCA: McKinnie v. State of Florida Appeal from Pinellas

• The Florida Second District Court of Appeal issued a decision in *Darryl McKinnie v. State of Florida* on October 9, 2026.
• Darryl McKinnie, represented by Blair Allen, appealed a ruling from the Pinellas County Circuit Court, presided over by Judge Phillip J. Federico.
• The case is formally identified by the appellate number 2D2025-1605.
• The available information details only the procedural aspects of the appeal, not the specific legal issues or the court's substantive ruling.
• Without the full opinion, the legal implications or precedential value of this appellate decision cannot be determined.

Without insight into the legal arguments presented, the court's analysis, or the ultimate disposition of the appeal, the decision's substantive impact remains unknown.

On October 9, 2026, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal issued a decision in the case identified as Darryl McKinnie v. State of Florida, bearing the case number 2D2025-1605. In this appellate proceeding, Darryl McKinnie was designated as the appellant, indicating he was challenging a prior judgment. The State of Florida was named as the appellee, representing the party against whom the appeal was brought.

This particular appeal originated from a ruling made by the Circuit Court for Pinellas County. The initial proceedings in the lower court were presided over by Judge Phillip J. Federico. Attorney Blair Allen, who currently serves as the elected Public Defender for Florida's Tenth Judicial Circuit, was listed as representing the appellant, Darryl McKinnie. While these details establish the procedural framework of the appellate action, the specific legal issues that were presented for review by the Second District Court of Appeal, along with the court's ultimate findings or the reasoning behind its decision, are not detailed in the available information.

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal operates as one of the state's intermediate appellate courts, responsible for reviewing decisions from trial courts within its designated geographical region, which includes Pinellas County. The primary function of such a court is to ascertain whether legal errors occurred during the original trial proceedings, rather than to conduct new trials or re-evaluate factual evidence. Cases brought before this court, such as *Darryl McKinnie v. State of Florida*, typically involve an appellant asserting that the lower court committed an error of law or procedure that warrants the reversal or modification of the initial judgment.

The case number, 2D2025-1605, serves as a unique identifier within the Second District's docket, indicating that the case was filed in 2025. The Circuit Court for Pinellas County, the source of this appeal, functions as a trial court of general jurisdiction in Florida, handling a broad spectrum of civil and criminal matters. Judge Phillip J. Federico's role as the presiding judge in the initial Pinellas County proceedings means that the appeal directly scrutinizes a decision or order he rendered at the trial level. The involvement of an attorney, Blair Allen, for the appellant underscores the formal legal process inherent in challenging a lower court's ruling.

While the procedural details of the *McKinnie v. State of Florida* appeal are clearly outlined, the absence of the full judicial opinion or a comprehensive summary of its legal issues significantly restricts its immediate practical value for legal professionals. The provided information confirms the occurrence of an appellate decision by the Florida Second District Court of Appeal on October 9, 2026, involving specific parties and originating from a particular lower court. However, without insight into the legal arguments presented, the court's analysis, or the ultimate disposition of the appeal, the decision's substantive impact remains unknown.

For attorneys, compliance officers, and other legal stakeholders, understanding the precise legal principles addressed and the court's reasoning is crucial for identifying any new precedents, interpreting existing statutes, or advising clients on analogous legal situations. The mere identification of an appellate case, its parties, and its originating court, while providing a record of a judicial event, does not furnish actionable legal guidance. Consequently, while the *McKinnie v. State of Florida* case is a documented part of the judicial record, its implications for legal practice or the broader legal landscape cannot be assessed based solely on the available procedural details.

The provided text only identifies the parties, court, and case number of this appellate decision. Without the full opinion or summary of its legal issues and holding, there is no actionable legal implication for lawyers or compliance officers.

Source: Original reporting via court docket information