PICKENS

v.

ARKANSAS; PEEK V. FLORIDA

Citator

Cited By (68 total)

• Terry v. State, 668 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1996)
  …ad probable cause to take the blood sample and find no “indication of probable tampering with the evidence” to support appellant’s claim that there was a break in the chain of custody. See Peek v. State, 395 So. 2d 492, 495 (Fla.1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 964, 101 S.Ct. 2036, 68 L.Ed.2d 342 (1981); see also Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 901.3 (1994 ed.) (“A bare allegation of tampering by the defendant is not sufficient to break the chain.”). . The relevant sections of the Florida Rules of Cri…
• Trotter v. State, 576 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1990)
  …e appellant was not incarcerated. Bolen-der v. State, 422 So. 2d 833 (Fla.1982), cert, denied, 461 U.S. 939, 103 S.Ct. 2111, 77 L.Ed.2d 315 (1983); Ferguson v. State, 417 So. 2d 631 (Fla.1982); Peek v. State, 395 So. 2d 492 (Fla.1980), cert, denied, 451 U.S. 964, 101 S.Ct. 2036, 68 L.Ed.2d 342 (1981). Penal statutes must be strictly construed in favor of the one against whom a penalty is to be imposed. Reino v. State, 352 So. 2d 853 (Fla.1977), receded from on other grounds, Perez v. State, 545 So. 2d 1357…
• Ferguson v. State, 417 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 1982)
  …murders, defendant was serving a two-year period of probation which followed an eighteen-month period of incarceration. He was not confined in prison at the time, nor was he supposed to be. In Peek v. State, 395 So. 2d 492 (Fla.1981), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 964, 101 S.Ct. 2036, 68 L.Ed.2d 384 (1981), we held that: Persons who are under an order of probation and are not at the time of the commission of the capital offense incarcerated or escapees from incarceration do not fall within the phrase “person und…

Authorities Cited

• Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (U.S. 1976)