Payne v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Payne v. State

630 So. 2d 235, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 434, 1994 WL 26998

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 2, 1994

DocketNo. 92-1689

StatusPublished

This text of 630 So. 2d 235 (Payne 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

Payne v. State, 630 So. 2d 235, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 434, 1994 WL 26998 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. We conclude that the self-incriminating statements which defendant made freely and voluntarily after being given his Miranda rights were properly admitted in evidence. Colorado v. Spring, 479 U.S. 564, 107 S.Ct. 851, 93 L.Ed.2d 954 (1987). We also conclude that the prosecutor’s comment was not an impermissible comment on defendant’s right to remain silent, but was rather a proper comment on the above-mentioned pretrial statements.

WARNER, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. We conclude that the self-incriminating statements which defendant made freely and voluntarily after being given his Miranda rights were properly admitted in evidence. Colorado v. Spring, 479 U.S. 564, 107 S.Ct. 851, 93 L.Ed.2d 954 (1987). We also conclude that the prosecutor’s comment was not an impermissible comment on defendant’s right to remain silent, but was rather a proper comment on the above-mentioned pretrial statements.

WARNER, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

630 So. 2d 235, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 434, 1994 WL 26998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack