final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for
Miami-Dade County, Lower Tribunal No. 14-15806 Jason E.
Dimitris, Judge. (3D18-511).
Non-final Appeals from the Circuit Court for Miami Dade
County, Jason E. Dimitris, Judge. (3D18-504 and 3D18-645).
F. Zenobi, Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel,
Third Region, and Philip L. Reizenstein, Assistant Regional
Counsel; Law Office of Richard F. Joyce, P.A., and Richard F.
Joyce; Laura J. Lee and Thomasina Moore (Sanford), for
Guardian ad Litem Program, for petitioners/appellants.
Holland & Knight LLP, and Sanford L. Bohrer and Scott D.
Ponce, for respondents/appellees Miami Herald Media Company
and Carol Marbin Miller; Leslie Hinds, for respondent
Department of Children and Families.
ROTHENBERG, C.J., and LAGOA and LOGUE, JJ.
these three cases, which we consolidate, C.H.-C., a juvenile,
has filed a petition for writ of certiorari, he and his
siblings have filed an appeal, and his mother has filed a
separate appeal, challenging an order entered by the trial
court which they characterize as allowing a newspaper to have
access to confidential court records. Because the court has
not yet entered an order granting access to the records at
issue-the order under review merely establishes a procedure
for an in-camera review of proposed redactions-we dismiss the
petition and the appeals for lack of jurisdiction.
his siblings, and their parents are the subjects of
dependency proceedings filed by the Florida Department of
Children and Families. The Miami Herald and one of its
reporters noted for her reporting of child welfare matters,
Carol Marbin Miller, moved to intervene in the proceedings
and obtain an audio recording or transcript of a January 17,
2018 judicial review hearing. Rule 2.420 of the Florida Rules
of Judicial Administration requires public access to most
court records but protects the confidentiality of certain
court records including "Chapter 39 records relating to
dependency matters." Chapter 39 courtroom proceedings
are open to the public but court records in Chapter 39
proceedings are not accessible to the public except
"upon order of the court by persons deemed by the court
to have a proper interest therein." § 39.0132(3),
Fla. Stat (2017).
order under review, the trial court held the Miami Herald and
the reporter "have standing to intervene for the purpose
of obtaining access to the transcript and/or recording of the
January 17, 2018 hearing and they are persons whom the Court
deems to have proper interest in the records at issue."
The order provides for an in-camera inspection of the
transcript. In pertinent part, the order reads:
2. In light of the circumstances in which this issue has
arisen, and in an abundance of caution, this Court has
directed that a transcript of the January 17 hearing be
circulated to permit any of the parties, including the
Attorney ad Litem, to ask the Court to redact portions of the
transcript prior to providing it to Movants.
3. Without objection from the parties, the Court will permit
Mr. Bohrer, counsel for Movants, to respond to any proposed
redactions, which process will be conducted in
camera. In consideration for being permitted to
participate in this process, Mr. Bohrer shall not disclose
anything learned during this in camera process to
language indicates, although the order states it is
"granting" the motion, it does not actually grant
the Herald or its reporter access to the transcript as
requested in the motion. Instead, it establishes a procedure
for a review of further objections in an in-camera
proceeding. Any order granting access will be entered, if at
all, only after the in-camera hearing. Although the order
holds the Herald and the reporter have standing and are
deemed to have a proper interest, this holding itself is
non-final and can be changed by the trial judge before it
actually grants access.
therefore lack jurisdiction to hear the appeals of this order
because it is non-final and is not one of the enumerated
non-final orders that are subject to interlocutory appeal.
See Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(3). We also lack
jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari regarding this
order because it does not actually grant access to records of
the judicial branch and it presents no irreparable harm that
cannot be corrected by appeal or petition for certiorari when
and if the trial court grants the Herald and its reporter
access. See, e.g., Damsky v. Univ. of
Miami, 152 So.3d 789, 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)