JOSE CARLOS GARCIA, 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.
The court held that the appellant's conviction for receiving stolen property was valid and that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress or admitting voluntary statements.
The appellant was convicted of buying, receiving, or concealing stolen property after police observed furs in his car during a traffic stop, which wer…
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 Buying, Receiving Or Concealing Stolen Property cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant was informed against, tried and convicted of the crime of buying, receiving or concealing stolen property, and sentenced to confinement for a period of five years. The contentions presented on his appeal have been considered in the light of the record, briefs and argument and are found to be without merit.
The incarceration of the defendant on this and other charges for a considerable period before trial furnishes no basis for reversal of the judgment. The defendant was represented by counsel, and there is no showing that the period of his incarceration before trial operated to prejudice his defense of the cause. Loy v. Grayson, Fla.1957, 99 So.2d 555; Kemp v. State, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 58. The trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence of stolen property, obtained by police at the time of and following the arrest. When the defendant was stopped by police and placed under arrest for observed traffic violations, the arresting officer directed his flashlight into the automobile which defendant had been driv*762ing and observed furs on tlie rear seat. .The items were found to be stolen property and the defendant was charged as above stated. • Joyner v. State, 157 Fla. 874, 27 So.2d 349; State v. Simmons, Fla.1956, 85 So.2d 879.
We have considered, and rej ected as lacking in merit, the further contention of the appellant that certain admissions voluntarily made by him to the police were improperly received in evidence. See Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719, 86 S.Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed.2d 882.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
AVIS v. State, 221 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)…o search of the car at the sheriffs office. He simply was sent to the car to retrieve an item that had already been discovered lying openly about the car by the arresting officer. These facts seem to be controlled by the decision in Garcia v. State, 196 So. 2d 761 (Fla.App.). In any event, even were we to consider the retrieval of this evidence as being pursuant to a search, said, search at worst was only a second search not so remote in time or place with respect to the arrest and thus permissible under the…
-
Tuma v. State, 291 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Joyner v. State, 157 Fla. 874, 27 So. 2d 349 (1946); State v. Simmons, Fla.1956, 85 So. 2d 879; Garcia v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 196 So. 2d 761; Avis v. State, Fla.App.1969, 221 So. 2d 235.…
-
Tamayo v. State, 226 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Evans v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 218 So. 2d 515; Brown v. State, Fla. 1968, 206 So. 2d 377; Gertman v. State, Fla.App.1969, 223 So. 2d 798; Section 918.10, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.; and Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1967, 196 So. 2d 761.…
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719 (U.S. 1966)
- Alton LOY v. Grayson, 99 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 1957)
- State v. Julis Simmons, 85 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 1956)
- Vasco Joyner and Jesse Joyner v. State, 157 Fla. 874 (Fla. 1946)
- Kemp v. State, 177 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)