Anderson v. State

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

In its motion for rehearing, the state alleges that our opinion of July 8, 1988, misstates certain facts relevant to the disposition of this appeal. Our review of the record, however, only serves to affirm the correctness of the facts stated in our opinion.

Furthermore, for the first time on appeal, the state advances the concept of inevitable discovery exemplified in Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431, 104 S.Ct. 2501, 81 L.Ed.2d 377 (1984). As the state did not argue this doctrine in its brief, it cannot raise it on rehearing. Alvarado v. State, 466 So.2d 335 (Fla. 2d DCA…