From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mullings v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jul 23, 1984
452 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

No. 82-2390.

June 26, 1984. Rehearing Denied July 23, 1984.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Ellen Morphonios, J.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Diane Leeds, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HUBBART, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.


Having reviewed the record we conclude that the trial court did not err in declining to suppress the defendant's inculpatory statements to the investigating officers. At most the record indicates that although the defendant may have requested that the interrogation cease (and his request was certainly not so interpreted by the officers), he thereafter signed a rights-waiver form (his second) and continued with the interrogation.

The imposition of three consecutive minimum mandatory sentences was error. We note, however, that in imposing them the trial court was without the benefit of Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1983). The three consecutive minimum mandatory sentences are reduced to one.

Affirmed as modified.


Summaries of

Mullings v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jul 23, 1984
452 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Mullings v. State

Case Details

Full title:CARL MULLINGS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jul 23, 1984

Citations

452 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

C.T. v. State

this fact (Tr. 14), Von Horn v. State, 334 So.2d 43, 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 341 So.2d 1086…