Marshall v. State

522 So. 2d 100, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 747, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1165, 1988 WL 23460
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Marshall v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 529 So. 2d 797
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 22, 1988·No. No. 87-1786·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals his conviction of involuntary sexual battery committed upon a minor female. His claims here focus upon the admission at trial of inculpatory statements made by him to detectives after having received his Miranda rights and, in particular, to such a statement made to one of the examining psychiatrists appointed by the court to evaluate his competence to stand trial. Contrary to appellant’s claims of incompetence, his behavior appeared normal when the inculpatory statements were made, and we can find no evidence to support the claim of any police coercion or overreaching so as to render those statements other than the product of his rational, free will. Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 107 S.Ct. 515, 93 L.Ed.2d 473 (1986). Unlike the situation in Rickard v. State, 508 So.2d 736 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), relied upon by the appellant, the defendant’s emotional condition in the present case at the time the inculpatory statements were made was fully explored and assessed by the trial judge prior to his determination of the defendant’s competency to stand trial and the eventual admission of those statements at trial.

Affirmed.

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

Marshall v. State, 522 So. 2d 100, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 747, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1165, 1988 WL 23460 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

522 So. 2d 100 (Marshall v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Colorado v. Connelly
479 U.S. 157 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Rickard v. State
508 So. 2d 736 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)