Morgan v. State

342 So. 2d 992, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15360
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Morgan v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 303 So. 2d 393
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 1, 1977·No. No. 76-352·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a conviction based on a jury verdict finding him guilty of first degree murder.

It is appellant’s contention that the state failed to establish that appellant’s arrest was supported by probable cause. Based upon that ground, appellant moved to suppress the physical evidence and oral admissions obtained as a result of the alleged unlawful arrest. The court denied the motion to suppress.

Appellant’s sole point on appeal is that: “The trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress where the state failed to establish that the defendant’s arrest was supported by probable cause, thereby violating the defendant’s rights as guaranteed by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to The Constitution of the United States.”

The ground relied on by appellant for reversal has been carefully considered in the light of the record on appeal, briefs and arguments of counsel. It is our conclusion that no reversible error has been made to appear. Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307, 79 S.Ct. 329, 3 L.Ed.2d 327 (1959); Salas v. State, 246 So.2d 621 (Fla.3d DCA 1971); Rodriquez v. State, 189 So.2d 656 (Fla.3d DCA 1966).

Affirmed.

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

Morgan v. State, 342 So. 2d 992, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15360 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

342 So. 2d 992 (Morgan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Draper v. United States
358 U.S. 307 (Supreme Court, 1959)
Rodriquez v. State
189 So. 2d 656 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Salas v. State
246 So. 2d 621 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)