D.T.N., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2002-05-31
No. 2D00-4252
ALTENBE RND, NORTHCUTT, and KELLY, JJ., Concur.
826 So. 2d 365 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Pendarvis v. State, 752 So. 2d 75, 76 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (holding that “[a] pretrial motion to suppress is not preserved for appellate review unless the defendant makes a specific contemporaneous objection at the time the evidence is admitted.”)

ALTENBE RND, NORTHCUTT, and KELLY, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Smith Dessin v. State, 868 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
    …rial motion to suppress is not preserved for appellate review unless the defendant makes a specific, contemporaneous objection at the time the evidence is admitted.” Pendarvis v. State, 752 So. 2d 75, 76 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); see also D.T.N. v. State, 826 So. 2d 365, 366 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Therefore, if trial counsel did not object at trial to the admission of the evidence that was the subject of the motion to suppress, that issue was not properly preserved for review, and counsel’s performance was deficient.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw