Legal Opinion

State v. Murray

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 7, 2011No. 5D10-1376PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOrfinger, J.

While allegedly street racing, Daniel Murray and James Brink were involved in a crash that killed another motorist. As a result, the State charged both men as principals to vehicular homicide. The State now appeals the trial court’s order suppressing the test results obtained from the blood drawn from both men. Because Murray and Brink voluntarily consented to the blood draw, we reverse.

A motion to suppress involves mixed questions of law and fact. See, e.g., Seibert v. State, 923 So.2d 460, 468 (Fla.2006); Dewberry v. State, 905 So.2d 963, 965 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). In reviewing the trial…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Connor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2001
  3. State v. BenderSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
  4. Robertson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  5. Seibert v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2006

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. GeissDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
  2. Luis A. Montes-Valeton v. State of FloridaSupreme Court of Florida · 2017
  3. State v. Wade F. LilesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
  4. Cynthia Proctor Bedell v. State of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  5. Montes-Valeton v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014

6 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