CARL MULLINGS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CARL MULLINGS, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
452 So. 2d 1010
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984)
Caution
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
C.T. v. State, 460 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…nd the trial court properly admitted the juvenile’s confession in evidence below, Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96, 96 S.Ct. 321, 46 L.Ed.2d 313 (1975); Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 [*563] L.Ed.2d 694 (1966); Mullings v. State, 452 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Dean v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 438 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1983)