Legal Opinion

State v. D.M.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 26, 1995No. 94-1305PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

GREEN, Judge.

By way of certiorari, the State petitions for review of an order granting a motion to suppress. We grant the relief requested and quash the order under review.

In this action, the State filed a petition of delinquency charging D.M., a minor, with grand theft of merchandise from “Pic ’N Pay, d/b/a Shoe World.” D.M. filed a motion to suppress seeking to suppress his statements made to a detective Albert Pack. D.M. claimed that his statements to detective Pack were subject to suppression because they had been given without the benefit of “Miranda warnings” in accordance with Miranda…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. California v. BehelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Roberts v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Roman v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1985

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Badillo v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API