Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 30, 1988No. 87-1176PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant was charged by information with possession of cocaine. When his motion to suppress physical evidence failed, he pleaded nolo contendere, specifically preserving the right to appeal the denial of the suppression motion, which the trial court held to be dispositive. His plea was accepted and he was placed on probation. This appeal followed.

We approve and adopt the trial court’s original order, the material parts of which read as follows:

*1004This action came before the Court upon the Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized from the Defendant’s automobile. The Court having heard the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Pennsylvania v. MimmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Dunn v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
  4. Cheatem v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  5. State v. BrownDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. RuizDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  2. Brewer v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API