MICHAEL L. POWERS, ROBERT GRIGGS AND ROGER EUGENE SMITH, APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1982-11-17
Nos. AK-387 to AK-389
McCORD, BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
422 So. 2d 981 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1982) Caution
Cited by 20 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, prison inmates, were discovered by prison officials with weapons on their persons, given Miranda warnings, interrogated, and placed in administrative confinement. Some three months thereafter, appellants were charged with and arrested for possession of a weapon by a State prisoner. Appellants moved for discharge, alleging that their rights to speedy trial pursuant to Rule 3.191(a)(1), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure (1981), had been violated in that more than 180 days had passed since they were given Miranda warnings and placed in administrative confinement. The trial court denied these motions. We conclude the evidence does not show an arrest as of the date of administrative confinement for purposes of commencing the 180-day speedy trial time and, accordingly, affirm.

McCORD, BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Turner v. State, 442 So. 2d 1064 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
    …PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Powers v. State, 422 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and Lynn v. State, 436 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., SHIVERS and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.…
  • Lynn v. State, 436 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
    …affirmance, I do not agree with the majority’s broad statement that “administrative confinement is not an arrest under the speedy trial rule, and therefore, it does not start speedy trial time.” Ante at 416. The majority relies upon Powers v. State, 422 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), for its position. The Powers opinion, however, was careful to say that “the evidence [did] not show an arrest as of the date of administrative confinement for purposes of commencing the 180-day speedy trial time.... ” 422 So. 2d…
    1 / 2
  • State v. Miller, 437 So. 2d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
    …ppear in lieu of physical arrest. In the instant case, appellee was not arrested on April 12, 1982, but was merely given Miranda warnings and interrogated. This does not commence the speedy trial time period under the new rule. See Powers v. State, 422 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Accordingly, the order of the trial court is REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED for further proceedings. ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr. and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.…

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw