Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

McAdams v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 26, 2014No. 2D11-3158Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDavis, Chief Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion to the extent that it finds no error in the trial court’s denial of Mr. McAdams’ motion to suppress the incriminating statements he made to law enforcement prior to Miranda warnings being administered. However, I do concur with the majority’s conclusion that Mr. Mc-Adams’ convictions and sentences must be reversed because the trial court erred in denying Mr. McAdams’ motion to suppress evidence obtained by police after Miranda warnings were given but prior to detec-fives informing him that an attorney retained to represent him had come to the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. California v. BehelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Traylor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  4. State v. HaynesOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Roman v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1985

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API