King v. State
328 So. 2d 248, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14821
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in King v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 303 So. 2d 389 →
Opinions
As to appellant’s attack upon the constitutionality of F.S. 39.02(5) (c), we affirm on authority of Johnson v. State, Sup.Ct. Fla.1974, 314 So.2d 573 and Davis v. State, Sup.Ct.Fla. 1974, 297 So.2d 289.
Appellant’s second point is an attack upon the taped confession. We find that point to be without merit, finding that the authorities substantially met the require[249]*249ments of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 469, 470, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
King v. State, 328 So. 2d 248, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14821 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).
328 So. 2d 248 (King v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (Supreme Court, 1966)
Davis v. State
297 So. 2d 289 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1974)
Johnson v. State
314 So. 2d 573 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1975)