Rice v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
LEHAN, Judge.
We reverse defendant’s conviction. The issue of the voluntariness of defendant’s confession was addressed by the trial court at the hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress the confession. But it is not unmistakably clear from the record that the trial judge’s denial of the motion to suppress was predicated upon his conclusion that the confession was voluntary. Peterson v. State, 372 So.2d-1017, 1021 (Fla.2d DCA 1979), aff'd, 382 So.2d 701 (Fla.1980).
The procedure to be followed by a trial court in this type of situation is stated by the Florida Supreme Court in Peterson as…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Antone v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
- Finney v. BalkcomSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Peterson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
- Greene v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1977
- Peterson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1979
3Cited by3 opinions
- Alejo v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
- Dillow v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
- Hernandez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985