DOMINICK ANGEL BRETTI, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Dominick Angel Bretti was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. On appeal, Bretti challenged the validity of warrantless searches, the admission of a stolen driver's license found in his apartment, prosecutorial comments, and the denial of severance, but the appellate court found no reversible error and affirmed his conviction.
The arrest without a warrant was based on probable cause and valid. The consensual searches were valid as Bretti's consent was not coerced. The seized driver's license was properly admitted because it was discovered in plain view in appellant's apartment, was contraband, and its evidentiary use was only cumulative to other sufficient evidence of robbery. The prosecutor's comments on failure to explain possession of recently stolen property did not constitute an improper comment on failure to testify. The newspaper article did not warrant mistrial because jurors were questioned and confirmed they had not read it and were admonished. No abuse of discretion occurred in denying severance.
“The arrest without a warrant was based on probable cause. The motion to suppress evidence obtained by the officers in searches following arrest was properly denied. The searches were made with consent.”
Establishes the validity of the warrantless arrest and consensual searches as the foundation for the conviction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBretti was one of three men charged with armed robbery. He was arrested without a warrant based on probable cause. Officers conducted searches of Bret…
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 Contraband Seizure cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant Dominick Angel Bretti was one of three men informed against, tried and convicted of the crime of armed robbery. Appellant was sentenced to be confined in the state penitentiary for a period of fifteen years. On consideration of the record and briefs on this appeal taken by him we find that no reversible error has been demonstrated, and we affirm.
The arrest without a warrant was based on probable cause. The motion to suppress evidence obtained by the officers in searches following arrest was properly denied. The searches were made with con*7sent. Longo v. State, 157 Fla. 668, 26 So.2d 818. It was not made to appear that appellant’s consent to search was coerced. See Shay v. State, Fla.1954, 70 So.2d 363. Appellant contended the consent which he gave to search his car and apartment for the stolen jewels and furs did not operate as a consent to search otherwise, and that the court should have suppressed the evi-dentiary item represented by another person’s driver’s license found there. We can not agree. The license was discovered to have been stolen, and to have been used by appellant to rent the automobile employed in the robbery. When found in appellant’s apartment, the license was lying in plain view. The appellant disclaimed it, and professed to know nothing about it. Under those circumstances, and because of the contraband nature of the item, its seizure was authorized. Its evidentiary use, as a link in a chain of events connecting appellant with the robbery was only cumulative to other sufficient evidence thereof. The comment by the prosecutor in argument on the failure of defendants to furnish reasonable explanation of possession of recently stolen property when discovered, did not amount to a comment by the prosecutor on failure of defendants to testify in their own behalf at the time of trial. Romanello v. State, Fla.App.1964, 160 So.2d 529; Miley v. State, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 299. A newspaper article published during the trial, claimed by appellant to have been prejudicial, was not a basis for mistrial. It was established by the trial judge upon inquiry of the jurors that they had not read the article, and they were admonished not to do so. Moreover, a mistrial motion was not made. No abuse of discretion was shown in the refusal of the trial judge to grant appellant a severance. Manson v. State, Fla.1956, 88 So.2d 272; Jackman v. State, Fla.App.1962, 140 So.2d 627.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Panzavecchia v. State, 311 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…where the trial court was accorded a measure of discretion, the exercise of which will not be disturbed on appeal unless the party challenging it shall sustain his burden to show it represented an abuse of discretion. Bretti v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 192 So. 2d 6; Moore v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 259 So. 2d 179; Demps v. State, Fla.1973, 272 So. 2d 803. In denying the defendant’s motion for severance of the offenses the trial court necessarily concluded that severance was not necessary (or “appropriate”, as st…
-
State v. Custer, 251 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)…. 2d 818. . Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694. .See, James v. State (Fla.App.1969), 223 So. 2d 52. See, also, United States v. Goosbey (USOA 6th Cir.1970), 419 F. 2d 818. . See, Bretti v. State (Fla.App.1966), 192 So. 2d 6.…
-
Bretti v. State, 210 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…PER CURIAM. The state has moved this court to dismiss appellant’s appeal on the ground that the appellant has fled to avoid commencement of sentence under another conviction, which was affirmed by this court. See Bretti v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So. 2d 6. We hold that there is merit in the state’s motion and appeal should be dismissed. See Decree v. State, Fla.App.1965, 180 So. 2d 667. It is so ordered.…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Longo v. State, 157 Fla. 668 (Fla. 1946)
- Jackman v. State, 140 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Romanello v. State, 160 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Emmett Manson v. State, 88 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 1956)
- Shay v. State, 70 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1954)
- Miley v. State, 186 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)