STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
DAKARI CLAYTON
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.
A trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress is reviewed with a presumption of correctness, and the appellate court must interpret evidence and reasonable inferences in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court's ruling.
[1] A trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress is reviewed on appeal with a presumption of correctness, and the appellate court must interpret evidence and reasonable inf…
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 a motion to suppress comes to the appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness and the court must interpret the evidence and reasonable inferences and deductions derived therefrom in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court's ruling.”
Standard of review for suppression motions
Dakari Clayton was charged in a criminal case in Miami-Dade County. The trial court granted Clayton's motion to suppress.…
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 Presumption Of Correctness cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed November 5, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-0665 Lower Tribunal No. F20-12458A ________________
State of Florida, Appellant,
vs.
Dakari Clayton, Appellee.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michelle Delancy, Judge.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General and Katryna Santa Cruz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.
Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Cruz v. State, 320 So. 3d 695, 712 (Fla. 2021) (“A trial
2 court’s ruling on a motion to suppress comes to the appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness and the court must interpret the evidence and reasonable inferences and deductions derived therefrom in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s ruling.” (quoting Jackson v. State, 18 So. 3d 1016, 1027 (Fla. 2009))).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jackson v. State, 18 So. 3d 1016 (Fla. 2009)
- Cruz v. State, 320 So. 3d 695 (Fla. 2021)