Lattimore v. State

323 So. 2d 5, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 18865
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 2, 1975
DocketNo. 75-641
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 323 So. 2d 5 (Lattimore 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
Lattimore v. State, 323 So. 2d 5, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 18865 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was charged by information with the crime of second degree murder, for the fatal stabbing of his wife. Upon a non-jury trial, he was found and adjudged guilty, was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of ten years, and appealed.

In response to a call to the police, shown to have been made by the appellant, reporting that a woman had been cut, a police officer went to the address given, which was the appellant’s residence. On entering and inquiring with reference thereto, the officer was led by the appellant to a bedroom where he observed a woman lying on a bed bleeding from stab wounds but still alive. The officer inquired of the appellant as to the whereabouts of the knife.1 Thereupon appellant produced a bloody kitchen knife from a table or dresser in the room and handed it over to the officer. Thereafter the appellant was placed under arrest, and later, after having been duly warned of his rights, was questioned at which time he made a statement.

On this appeal it is contended by the appellant that the trial court committed reversible error by overruling a defense objection to introduction of the knife into evidence by the State. On consideration of the briefs, argument and the record, we hold that the questioned ruling of the trial court was not error. See: § 901.151(5), Fla.Stat, F.S.A. The officer’s question was prior to the arrest of the appellant, and was not made in the course of any custodial interrogation. The knife produced thereby by the appellant was not inadmissible. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694; United States v. Montos, 5th Cir. 1970, 421 F.2d 215; Koran v. United States, 5th Cir. 1972, 469 F.2d 1071. The inquiry which resulted in the disclosure of the knife was general on-the-scene questioning. See: Melero v. State, Fla.App.1975, 306 So.2d 603; Hill v. State, Fla.App.1969, 223 So.2d 548.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Duhart v. State
348 So. 2d 387 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
323 So. 2d 5, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 18865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lattimore-v-state-fladistctapp-1975.