ARMANDO AMADOR, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1989-03-21
No. 88-267
Before BARKDULL and BASKIN, JJ., and JOSEPH P. McNULTY, Associate Judge.
539 So. 2d 1180 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1989)

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. Benefield v. State, 160 So. 2d 706 (Fla.1964); State v. Maya, 529 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); State v. Duda, 437 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Mathes v. State, 375 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 99 S.Ct. 421, 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978); Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978); Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971); United States v. Garcia, 741 F. 2d 363 (11th Cir.1984).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw