cluded that the Legislature intended to ban possession of all pornographic materials. Kasischke 946 So. 2d at 1159. In contrast, in a similar case, the Second District interpreted the same condition, albeit superficially, to prohibit only possession of materials relevant to the defendant's "particular deviant beha

o the mandates of Rule 1.440 is reversible error). Once the trial begins, the error cannot be undone. A final appeal is an insufficient remedy. As the Second District explained in Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015): It is true that the Gawker defendants have available to them the lega

cause "[i]t is clear that Judge Holtzendorf considered the psychological report and letters in making his sentencing decision." Id. Interestingly, the Second District also rejected the argument that since the documents were never filed, the judge had not sealed them. "[I]t was the nonfiling of the documents that