ROLDY DANIEL
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting video of law enforcement interrogating the defendant.
[1] A trial court does not abuse its discretion in admitting video evidence of law enforcement interrogating a defendant.
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 intelligenceRoldy Daniel appealed a conviction from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County. The appeal concerned the admissibil…
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 Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review) cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
ROLDY DANIEL, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2024-0775
[December 3, 2025]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Jeffrey Gillen, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2019-CF-004347-
AXXX-MB.
Daniel Tibbitt of Daniel J. Tibbitt, P.A., North Miami, for appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kimberly T. Acuña, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 397 So. 3d 626, 637–38 (Fla. 2024) (finding trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting video of law enforcement interrogating defendant).
KUNTZ, C.J., CIKLIN and SHAW, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.