PETER LIND PAUL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to suppress the defendant's statement and in denying challenges for cause against four jurors.
The defendant was convicted of sexual battery on a child and committing a lewd act. He made a statement to a deputy on the way to the station and chal…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Challenge For Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, J.
Peter Lind Paul [“defendant”] appeals his convictions in two consolidated cases of five counts of sexual battery on a child under twelve years of age while acting in a familial capacity and one count of committing a lewd and lascivious act in the presence of a child. We affirm.
The trial court did not err by refusing to suppress the statement that defendant made to Deputy Faulkingham on the way to the police station. No Miranda warnings were required because defendant was not in custody and was not subjected to an interrogation. Thus, defendant is not entitled to suppression of his voluntary statement that “it was a bad situation at the house' seeing Amanda in her nightgown and taking a bath while he was there.”
Defendant has also failed to demonstrate that the denial of the challenges for cause he directed at four jurors was an abuse of discretion. Although all four of these people either knew someone who was involved in a sex crime or had themselves been the victim of a sex crime, all of the underlying events were, in some sense, remote, and all of these jurors unequivocally indicated that they would be able to render a verdict based on the evidence and not on their personal beliefs, feelings or experiences. Kokal v. Dugger, 718 So. 2d 138 (Fla.1998).
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McGEE v. State, 762 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Caruso v. State, 645 So. 2d 389 (Fla.1994); Paul v. State, 742 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Brown v. State, 592 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).…
Authorities Cited
- Kokal v. Dugger, 718 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1998)