STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JUSTIN WADE SULLIVAN, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed suppression of defendant's confession based on voluntariness concerns but reversed the trial court's finding of a due process violation from failure to fully record the interview.
A confession may be suppressed when the trial court, after considering the totality of circumstances, finds the State failed to prove voluntariness, and failure to tape record an entire interview does not violate due process absent bad faith.
[1] Police officers are not required to tape record confessions, and failure to record an entire interview does not violate due process when the officer was not acting in bad…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial court's ruling on the voluntariness of a confession will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous.”
Standard of review for voluntariness determinations
Justin Wade Sullivan was charged with capital sexual battery. Law enforcement interviewed Sullivan and obtained a confession, but did not record the e…
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 Capital Sexual Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State of Florida appeals an order suppressing Justin Wade Sullivan’s confession to the charge of capital sexual battery. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court considered the totality of the circumstances and ruled that the State failed to meet its burden of establishing that Sullivan’s confession was voluntary. A trial court’s ruling on the voluntariness of a confession will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous. E.g., Bonifay v. State, 626 So. 2d 1310 (Fla.1993). Because the defense presented ample evidence which called into doubt the voluntariness of Sullivan’s confession, the trial court’s ruling on this issue must stand. Id. The trial court also separately determined that law enforcement violated Sullivan’s due process rights by failing to record their interview with Sullivan in its entirety. First, police officers are not required to tape record confessions. E.g., State v. Williams, 386 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). Second, the trial court expressly found that the officer was not acting in bad faith when he failed to tape Sullivan’s entire interview. Under these circumstances, Sullivan’s due process rights were not violated as a matter of law. See, e.g., State v. Daniels, 699 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).
Therefore, we affirm the suppression of Sullivan’s confession but reverse that portion of the order finding a due process violation.
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
PLEUS, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bonifay v. State, 626 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1993)
- State v. Williams, 386 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)
- State v. Daniels, 699 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)