Legal Opinion
Reaves v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided October 23, 1984No. 82-1493PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge.
We hold that the defendant’s statements, suppressed for the sole reason that the police, in violation of Miranda v. Arizona and its progeny,1 failed to scrupulously honor the defendant’s assertion of his right to remain silent, are admissible to impeach the defendant despite defense *54counsel’s claim that in reliance on the trial court’s inadvertent remark that the statements were being suppressed as “involuntary,” defense counsel advised the defendant that the statements could not be used for any purpose.2
Reaves was charged with the first-degree murder of one Michael…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Michigan v. MosleySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Jones v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Reaves v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
- Saucier v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986