THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
NATHANIEL PRESSLEY, 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.
Florida's state appeal of a trial court's pretrial order suppressing a minor's oral confession to robbery. The court reversed the suppression order, holding that oral confessions are admissible if properly established by competent testimony, and that suppression motions address only illegality, not credibility or weight of evidence.
The court held that the trial court erred in suppressing the oral confession. A motion to suppress addresses only whether a confession is tainted with illegality, not the credibility of the confession or witnesses. An oral confession is admissible if properly established by competent testimony, regardless of the trial judge's credibility concerns at the suppression hearing.
[1] A motion to suppress a confession is intended to determine if the confession is tainted with illegality, not to assess the credibility of the confession or its witnesses.
[2] An oral confession is admissible if established by competent testimony.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The purpose of a motion to suppress a confession is to determine whether the confession offered is so clearly tainted with illegality that it may not be offered to the finder of fact. The motion does not reach the question of credibility of the confession or of the witnesses to the confession.”
Establishes the legal standard that suppression motions address only illegality, not credibility or evidentiary weight
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA 15-year-old defendant was taken to a police station, advised of his constitutional rights, and orally confessed to robbery during police interrogati…
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 Pretrial Motion To Suppress cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal brought by the state under authority of Rule 6.3, Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A., and § 924.071, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., from a pretrial order which granted defendant Nathaniel Pressley’s motion to suppress the evidence of his alleged confession. The alleged confession, evi*735dence of which was suppressed, was testified to have been orally given to police officers upon interrogation. It was testified that the defendant, a fifteen year old boy, was taken to the police station where after having been advised of his constitutional rights he confessed to the crime of robbery. The officers did not reduce the confession to writing although the facilities to do so were available. In addition there was a discrepancy in the testimony of the two officers to the length of time the boy was under interrogation. From the record it appears that the trial judge had serious doubts as to credibility of the officers’ testimony and that he felt the confession should have been reduced to writing.
The purpose of a motion to suppress a confession is to determine whether the confession offered is so clearly tainted with illegality that it may not be offered to the finder of fact.1 The motion does not reach the question of credibility of the confession2 or of the witnesses to the confession.3 An oral confession is admissible if properly established by competent testimony.4 We hold therefore that the court erred in suppressing the evidence of the confession in the present instance. This holding is without prejudice to the right of the defendant-appellee to raise any and all objections to the admissibility of the confession, because the order reversed is a nullity.-5
The order suppressing the evidence of the oral confession is reversed and the cause remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Forbes, 235 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…PER CURIAM. By this appeal, the State seeks review of a pre-trial order granting a motion to suppress an alleged voluntary confession. The [*318] facts in this case are similar to those outlined in State v. Pressley, Fla.App.1970, 234 So. 2d 734. Upon the aforesaid authority, the order here under review is hereby reversed and declared a nullity, and the parties are relegated to the positions in the trial court that they occupied immediately prior to the entry of the order here under review…
Authorities Cited
- Morris v. State, 100 Fla. 850 (Fla. 1930)
- Bates v. State, 78 Fla. 672 (Fla. 1919)
- Johnson Kirby v. State, 44 Fla. 81 (Fla. 1902)
- Rosenkrantz v. Hall, 172 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Walker v. State, 219 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)