IN RE MACKAY, CALIFORNIA

v.

STEWART; JOHNSON ET AL. V. NEW JERSEY; SCHIFFER V. UNITED STATES; BAINES ET AL. V. CITY OF DANVILLE; WALLACE ET AL. V. VIRGINIA; EXQUISITE FORM BRASSIERE, INC. V. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION; SUBURBAN TILE CENTER, INC., ET AL. V. ROCKFORD BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO, ET AL.; DOUBLE EAGLE LUBRICANTS, INC. V. TEXAS; CHARLES A. WRIGHT, INC. V. F. D. RICH CO., INC.; BENNETT V. FORD MOTOR CO.; GROSSMAN ET VIR V. PEARLMAN ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Alvord v. Dugger, 541 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1989)
  …elf retroactive application on the premise that a violation of the Miranda rule was less likely to affect the reliability of a confession than one induced by coercion. Johnson v. New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719, 86 S.Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed.2d 882, reh’g denied, 385 U.S. 890, 87 S.Ct. 12, 17 L.Ed.2d 121 (1966). Based on this rationale, both Florida, Nowlin v. State, 346 So. 2d 1020 (Fla.1977), and the United States Supreme Court, Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222, 91 S.Ct. 643, 28 L.Ed.2d [*602] 1 (1971), permit confes…
• State v. R.M., 696 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
  …to suppress statements. The primary focus of the defendant’s motion in the trial court was a variation in the standard warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, reh’g denied sub nom, California v. Stewart, 385 U.S. 890, 87 S.Ct. 11, 17 L.Ed.2d 121 (1966). Before taking the defendant’s statement, the investigating detective gave the defendant her Miranda warnings. Included in the warnings was the statement that “[ajnything you say can and will be used either for yo…
• Turner v. State, 429 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
  …hat the confession was improperly obtained by law enforcement officers, because he had not been properly advised of his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, reh. denied sub nom., California v. Stewart, 385 U.S. 890, 87 S.Ct. 11, 17 L.Ed.2d 121 (1966). At the suppression hearing, evidence of other investigation sessions was presented, including one session that occurred on July 28th, revealing that appellant admitted, contrary to his earlier statement that he…