PAUL D. WELLS, PETITIONER,

v.

JAMES CROSBY, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• State v. Edenfield, 27 So. 3d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
  …ose version of those facts should be believed— Deputy Frenton’s or Edenfield’s. On a motion to suppress, the circuit court is responsible for weighing the evidence and making factual findings concerning the credibility of witnesses. Dillow v. State, 884 So. 2d 508, 510 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Brown v. State, 852 So. 2d 60, 61 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). In this case, the trial court erred in not doing so because the determination of this factual dispute is the linchpin to a correct legal decision on Edenfield’s motion t…
• Mack v. State, 231 So. 3d 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)
  …ecifically before the court and the record, with unmistakable clarity, supported the conclusion that the trial court found defendant’s statement to be voluntary by a preponderance of the evidence). This case is distinguishable from Dillow v. State, 884 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), in which the Second District reversed the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress because the trial court expressly refrained from making a crucial credibility determination as to the volun-tariness of the conf…
• Pavon v. State, 12 So. 3d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
  …consent to the inspection of his vehicle and apartment to be voluntary by a preponderance of the evidence. Therefore, the confession and evidence were rightfully admitted, and the denial of the motion to suppress was not error. See Dillow v. State, 884 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

• Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)