AMIRI

v.

ROLEX WATCH U.S.A., INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Kearse v. State, 770 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 2000)
  …We have also concluded that the compelled mental health examination required by rule 3.202 does not violate the Fifth Amendment’s proscription against compelled self-incrimination. See Davis v. State, 698 So. 2d 1182, 1191 (Fla. 1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1127, 118 S.Ct. 1076, 140 L.Ed.2d 134 (1998); Dillbeck, 643 So. 2d at 1030-31. Accordingly, we agree with the trial court’s determination that rule 3.202 is applicable to the instant case and find no merit to the remainder of issue 2 and issues 15 and 1…
• Knight v. State, 721 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 1998)
• State v. Shawanta Scott, 786 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
  …1228, 1231 (Fla.1985). ‘The proper inquiry is not the unarticulated plan of the police, but rather how a reasonable person in the suspect’s position would have perceived the situation.’ Davis v. State, 698 So. 2d 1182, 1188 (Fla.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1127, 118 S.Ct. 1076, 140 L.Ed.2d 134 (1998); see Roman, 475 So. 2d at 1231. The question of whether a suspect is in custody is a mixed question of law and fact. See Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U.S. 99, 106-07, 116 S.Ct. 457, 133 L.Ed.2d 383 (1995). The…