Parker v. State

ERVIN, Chief Judge,

specially concurring.

The court’s opinion does not discuss appellants’ arguments regarding substantive defects in the application for the wiretap or reveal the factual context of the case. Although I concede that appellants have advanced substantial arguments supporting their appeal from the denial of their motion to suppress, I nevertheless concur in the affirmance because I consider the application taken as a whole demonstrates sufficient adherence to the statutory safeguards.

This case involves surveillance by law enforcement officers of occupants of a Gainesville…