RICHARD E. COX, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Appellant's conviction for robbery and firearm possession reversed because arresting officers were improperly permitted to testify about his post-custody silence, violating his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Testimony regarding a defendant's silence while in custody violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and requires reversal of conviction.
[1] Testimony by arresting officers regarding a defendant's silence while in custody violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and requires reversal of co…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“he was deprived of his constitutional right against self-incrimination when the State was permitted to elicit testimony at trial from the arresting officers concerning his silence while in custody”
Court's statement of the constitutional violation that required reversal
Cox was convicted after jury trial of robbery and unlawful firearm possession. He had previously pleaded guilty to unlawful firearm possession by a co…
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 Constitutional Right Against Self-Incrimination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant was convicted after a jury trial on the charges of robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. He had previously entered a guilty plea to the charge of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was sentenced to a term of 75 years imprisonment on the robbery count, followed by a 5 year term for unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. A concurrent term of 5 years was imposed for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. On appeal, the 5 year term for possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense was eliminated. In all other respects, his conviction was affirmed. Cox v. State, 300 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974).
In his first appeal, he attacked only the validity of his sentence. He now requests, and was granted, a belated appeal of his conviction pursuant to Baggett v. Wainwright, 229 So. 2d 239 (Fla.1969).
The appellant contends that he was deprived of his constitutional right against self-incrimination when the State was permitted to elicit testimony at trial from the arresting officers concerning his silence while in custody. We agree and reverse on the authority of Bennett v. State, 316 So. 2d 41 (Fla.1975).
In light of our decision to reverse, we need not consider or rule upon the appellant’s other point on appeal.
Reversed.
KEHOE, Judge
(dissenting).
I would affirm in the instant appeal for the reasons set forth in Judge Grimes’ majority opinion in Clark v. State, 336 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Baggett v. Louie L. Wainwright, 229 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1969)
- Bennett v. State, 316 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1975)
- Clark v. State, 336 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- A. B. C. Bus. Forms, Inc. v. Gelvan, 300 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)