LEO FRANCIS DANAHEY, APPELLANT,
v.
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 trial judge's ruling denying the motion to suppress the confession lacked the required "unmistakable clarity" of a finding of voluntariness.
Appellant's confession was admitted into evidence after the trial judge denied a motion to suppress it. The judge's statement denying the motion did n…
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 De Novo Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
The question involved here is whether the trial court found appellant’s confession to be voluntary with “unmistakable clarity” as required by McDole v. State, Fla.1973, 283 So. 2d 553, which in turn was based upon Sims v. Georgia, 385 U.S. 538, 87 S.Ct. 639, 17 L.Ed.2d 593 (1967).
At the close of the hearing on appellant’s motion to suppress, the trial judge stated: “I am going to deny that motion. The jury will be able to put what weight they want on this.” He then admitted the confession and appellant was convicted of robbery.
The language used by the trial judge is almost verbatim the language used in McDole v. State, supra. So strikingly similar is it that the state conceded during oral argument that it does not comply with the rule announced in McDole. However, in fairness to the trial judge it should be noted that McDole had not been decided at the time he made the ruling in question. And prior to McDole no doubt many a trial judge thought it obvious when he denied a motion to suppress a confession based on the contention it was involuntary that he had found the confession to be voluntary. However, now we all know there must be an express finding of voluntariness set forth in the record.
Since this case must be reversed for a new trial, Land v. State, Fla.1974, 293 So. 2d 704, it is not necessary for us to decide appellant’s second point which contends that the state failed to carry the burden of proof of voluntariness on the motion to suppress.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence is reversed and the cause is remanded for a new trial including a de novo hearing on appellant’s motion to suppress the alleged confession.
WALDEN and MAGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Greene v. State, 351 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1977)…51 So. 2d 1031 (filed August 20, 1976), which allegedly conflicts on the same point of law with a decision of this Court (Land v. State, 293 So. 2d 704 (Fla.1974)), a prior decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (Danahey v. State, 298 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)), and a recent opinion from the District Court of Appeal, First District (Pitts v. State, 335 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). As the forthcoming reasoning will more fully expound, we have jurisdiction.1 Petitioner was charged an…
-
Collins v. Louie L. Wainwright, 311 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…onclude that appellant has here made a contention of coercion which requires application of the McDole rule and necessitates an express finding on the record by the trial judge that the statement was made voluntarily. Danahey v. State, Fla.App.1974, 298 So. 2d 444. In view of the foregoing, the judgment and sentence is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions that — based upon the record already made before him — the trial judge make an express finding as to whether the statement was voluntary or n…
-
Starr v. State, 518 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…uted to the conviction. State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986). Furthermore, the trial court never made any finding of voluntariness with “unmistakable clarity” as required by McDole v. State, 283 So. 2d 553 (Fla.1973), and Danahey v. State, 298 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). Finally, during closing argument, defense counsel pointed out to the jury that [*1392] the state failed to prove that the baggie containing the cocaine had any of Starr’s fingerprints on it. The trial court sustained the state’…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sims v. Georgia, 385 U.S. 538 (U.S. 1967)
- McDOLE v. State, 283 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1973)
- Land v. State, 293 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 1974)