Carrillo v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 775 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). · Go Syfert
Search
Carrillo v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 775 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lissette
v.
CARRILLO v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION
No. 3D00-2610.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan 17, 2001.
775 So. 2d 430
Lissette V. Carrillo, in proper person., John D. Maher (Tallahassee), for appel-lees.
Goderich, Jorgenson, Shevin.
Published
PER CURIAM.

The claimant, Lissette V. Carrillo, appeals from the denial of unemployment benefits. We affirm.

The claimant has failed to successfully challenge the findings of fact that were made by the appeals referee because she cannot demonstrate that the findings are not supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Ford v. Southeast Atl. Corp., 588 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Based on the findings made by the appeals referee, the Unemployment Appeals Commission’s conclusion that the claimant was discharged for misconduct connected with work must be affirmed. See Tallahassee Housing Auth. v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 483 So.2d 413 (Fla.1986); Martinson v. Breit’s Tower Serv., Inc., 680 So.2d 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

Affirmed.