DAVID FREEMAN BOYKIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The only issue on appeal relates to the failure of the learned trial judge to grant a timely motion to suppress evidence. Our examination of the record reveals that there was a conflict in the testimony as to whether or not the search giving rise to the seizure of the evidence was a “consent search”. There was ample testimony to support the trial judge’s conclusion that it was. It is axiomatic that determination of issues of fact based upon conflicting evidence is the prerogative of the trier of the fact and if that determination is supported by substantial competent evidence it may not be reversed on appeal. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence appealed are
Affirmed.
RAWLS, C. J., and BOYER and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Younger v. State, 433 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)…’s conclusion that consent was voluntarily and freely given. There was no detention of appellant, only two requests for consent and, at best, conflicting evidence as to whether the officers threatened to obtain a search warrant. See Boykin v. State, 309 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (ample testimony, albeit conflicting, supported trial court’s conclusion that consent to search was given). Appellant next contends that the affidavit for the search warrant was insufficient. Detective Stafford stated in the aff…
-
NOE v. State, 586 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…l. Caso v. State, 524 So. 2d at 424. The determination of issues of fact based upon conflicting evidence is the prerogative of the trier of fact, and if supported by competent and substantial evidence, may not be reversed on appeal. Boykin v. State, 309 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). Miranda rights do not commence upon the discovery of facts justifying an arrest, or because a person is the focus of a criminal investigation. Beckwith v. United States, 425 U.S. 341, 96 S.Ct. 1612, 48 L.Ed.2d 1 (1976). The tes…
-
Aldama v. State, 400 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…were inherently incredible, no error is shown where the trial court’s findings of fact, from which flowed the unassailed and unassailable conclusion of law that the search was valid, were supported by substantial competent evidence, Boykin v. State, 309 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); and (2) the defendants’ motion to dismiss the information because signed by an Assistant State Attorney was properly denied, see State v. Rivero, 400 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence