Legal Opinion · Dissent

Reaves v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 23, 1984No. 82-1493Published

1DissentHendry, Judge

I respectfully dissent. In my view, reversal of appellant’s conviction is mandated where the prosecution was allowed to impeach appellant’s trial testimony, over objection, by the introduction of his post-arrest statements to police which the court had previously suppressed as involuntary.

Reaves’ pre-trial motion to suppress certain inculpatory post-arrest statements asserted, among other grounds, that 1) the statements were obtained in violation of appellant’s constitutionally guaranteed right to counsel and privilege against self-incrimination as interpreted in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Johnson v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Palmes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1981

13 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