Hatten v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hatten v. State

217 So. 2d 594

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 14, 1969

DocketNo. 1672

StatusPublished

This text of 217 So. 2d 594 (Hatten v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hatten v. State, 217 So. 2d 594 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal defendant Eugene Hatten claims a denial of his right to counsel at a line-up under United States v. Wade, 1967, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed. 2d 1149. Defendant himself concedes that the line-up confrontation took place prior to 12 June 1967, the effective date of Wade.

In Stovall v. Denno, 1967, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199. the Supreme Court held that Wade would not apply to confrontations held prior to 12 June 1967. We find defendant’s claim that the line-up in this case was so highly suggestive as to deprive him of due process to be without merit. Stovall v. Denno, supra; Bradley v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 657.

Accordingly, the judgment is

Affirmed.

WALDEN, C. J., and McCAIN and OWEN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal defendant Eugene Hatten claims a denial of his right to counsel at a line-up under United States v. Wade, 1967, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed. 2d 1149. Defendant himself concedes that the line-up confrontation took place prior to 12 June 1967, the effective date of Wade.

In Stovall v. Denno, 1967, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199. the Supreme Court held that Wade would not apply to confrontations held prior to 12 June 1967. We find defendant’s claim that the line-up in this case was so highly suggestive as to deprive him of due process to be without merit. Stovall v. Denno, supra; Bradley v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 657.

Accordingly, the judgment is

Affirmed.

WALDEN, C. J., and McCAIN and OWEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 So. 2d 594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatten-v-state-fladistctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack