Dependency Law Finder

Florida's dependency statutes, court rules and DCF operating procedures, with the appellate opinions that apply them

data.robertlathamesq.org · All tools

Before you use this site

This site aggregates legal authorities from a variety of public sources. It is AI and human reviewed. Text processing errors can occur. Always check the information here against the official linked source.

This site is publicly available. Use for general research only. Do not submit confidential or identifiable case information.

I don't agree: show the official sources

King v. State328 So. 2d 248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976) · DCAZ-443

Court
District Court of Appeal
Decided
1976-03-10
Law cited
§ 39.02(5)
On CourtListener
PER CURIAM.

As to appellant’s attack upon the constitutionality of F.S. 39.02(5) (c), we affirm on authority of Johnson v. State, Sup.Ct. Fla.1974, 314 So.2d 573 and Davis v. State, Sup.Ct.Fla. 1974, 297 So.2d 289.

Appellant’s second point is an attack upon the taped confession. We find that point to be without merit, finding that the authorities substantially met the require*249ments of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 469, 470, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

Affirmed.

BOYER, C. J., and McCORD, J., concur. RAWLS, J., dissents.

Opinion text: CourtListener, Free Law Project. Not an official reporter; check the court's version before citing.