Hoskins v. Wainwright

263 So. 2d 204, 1972 Fla. LEXIS 3592
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided May 31, 1972·No. No. 41995·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The writ of habeas corpus herein was granted and a return required on the sole issue of whether or not the trial court determined the voluntariness of petitioner’s confession prior to its introduction into evidence at trial. On consideration of the return, we conclude that the District Court of Appeal correctly decided in Hoskins v. State, 208 So.2d 145 (3rd D.C.A.Fla.1968), that this determination was properly made. In the course of disposing of petitioner’s Motion to Suppress, the trial court would have had to consider this issue.

The writ heretofore issued is discharged.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, Acting C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

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

Hoskins v. Wainwright, 263 So. 2d 204, 1972 Fla. LEXIS 3592 (Fla. 1972).

263 So. 2d 204 (Hoskins v. Wainwright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Blanding v. State
446 So. 2d 1135 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)