THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
PHILLIP DICKSON, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reweighing Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
This is a State appeal from an order granting the motion to suppress filed by defendant-appellee Phillip Dickson. The State argues that the trial court ruling is contrary to the proposition that “[a] court must accept evidence which ... is neither impeached, discredited, controverted, contradictory within itself, or physically impossible.” State v. Fernandez, 526 So.2d 192, 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
At the hearing, the rule was invoked and the two police officers testified separately. The testimony of the two officers differed on whether the defendant was walking forward, or backward, when he allegedly shoved one of the officers. The officers disagreed over whether it was a light push or strong shove that almost knocked the officer down. The court was also skeptical of whether it was physically possible for the officers to have taken the defendant into custody in the way that they described. The court was free to make its own credibility determination, and this court is not free to reweigh the evidence. See State v. Glatzmayer, 789 So.2d 297, 301 (Fla.2001); Byrd v. State, 964 So.2d 806, 806-07 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ojeda, 147 So. 3d 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…led marijuana immediately upon Ojeda’s opening of the front door met any of the criteria by which it could have been discounted by the trial judge, and the trial judge cites no such evidence. See State v. Fernandez, supra; see also State v. Dickson, 35 So. 3d 1027, 1027 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); State v. Wong, 990 So. 2d 1154,1156 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); State v. Casey, 821 So. 2d 1187, 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Cordero v. State, 669 So. 2d 1075,1076 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); State v. G.H., 549 So. 2d 1148,1149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1…
-
Guardian Ad Litem Program v. K.H. (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…State v. Fernandez, 526 So. 2d 192, 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (citing Flowers v. State, 143 So. 612, 613 (Fla. 1932); Brannen v. State, 114 So. 429, 430-31 (Fla. 1927); Harris v. State, 104 So. 2d 739, 742-43 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)). See State v. Dickson, 35 So. 3d 1027 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); State v. Wong, 990 So. 2d 1154, 1156 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); State v. Casey, 821 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). The plain language of section 39.806(1)(c), signaled by the word “may,” allows, but does not require, proof that a cas…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Glatzmayer, 789 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 2001)
- State v. Fernandez, 526 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Byrd v. State, 964 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)