ERIK MOTA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2011-11-04
No. 5D10-1471
ORFINGER, C.J., GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., concur.
73 So. 3d 850 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2011) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981) (asserting that accused may, after invoking right to counsel, voluntarily initiate further communication with police).

ORFINGER, C.J., GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Bill Kasper Constr. Co., Inc. v. Morrison, 93 So. 3d 1061 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)
    …e instant certiorari petition challenging the trial court’s ruling, contending that it constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law, causing material injury that cannot be remedied on appeal. See Fifth Third Bank v. ACA Plus, Inc., 73 So. 3d 850, 852 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). We disagree. This court has previously denied certiorari relief in similar circumstances due to the availability of post-judgment appellate relief. For example, in Ali Investments, Inc. v. First American Title Insurance, 9…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw