Pinkney v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pinkney v. State

351 So. 2d 1047, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 22504

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 18, 1977

DocketNo. 76-364

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 351 So. 2d 1047 (Pinkney 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

Pinkney v. State, 351 So. 2d 1047, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 22504 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

A police officer at the trial of this criminal case, while testifying for the State, said that when he read the defendant his Miranda rights at the scene, “he (the defendant) didn’t make any statements at that time other than he had just bought it (the stolen automobile) for three hundred dollars and that he didn’t have the registration or anything like that to it.” If it were constitutionally possible we would apply the “harmless error” rule to the facts of this case and affirm. However, we feel compelled to reverse upon the authority of Jones v. State, 200 So.2d 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Bennett v. State, 316 So.2d 41 (Fla.1975); Farese v. State, 328 So.2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Bostic v. State, 332 So.2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Martin v. State, 334 So.2d 841 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Shannon v. State, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla.1976); Lucas v. State, 335 So.2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Boyd v. State, 351 So.2d 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed November 26, 1976); Williams v. State, 340 So.2d 1191 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 3, 1976); Collins v. State, 340 So.2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 10, 1976); Spann v. State, 340 So.2d 1215 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 17, 1976); Maness v. State, 341 So.2d 246 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 24, 1976); Sylvester v. State, 341 So.2d 203 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed February 11, 1977).

REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.

DOWNEY and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

A police officer at the trial of this criminal case, while testifying for the State, said that when he read the defendant his Miranda rights at the scene, “he (the defendant) didn’t make any statements at that time other than he had just bought it (the stolen automobile) for three hundred dollars and that he didn’t have the registration or anything like that to it.” If it were constitutionally possible we would apply the “harmless error” rule to the facts of this case and affirm. However, we feel compelled to reverse upon the authority of Jones v. State, 200 So.2d 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Bennett v. State, 316 So.2d 41 (Fla.1975); Farese v. State, 328 So.2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Bostic v. State, 332 So.2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Martin v. State, 334 So.2d 841 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Shannon v. State, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla.1976); Lucas v. State, 335 So.2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Boyd v. State, 351 So.2d 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed November 26, 1976); Williams v. State, 340 So.2d 1191 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 3, 1976); Collins v. State, 340 So.2d 516 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 10, 1976); Spann v. State, 340 So.2d 1215 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 17, 1976); Maness v. State, 341 So.2d 246 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed December 24, 1976); Sylvester v. State, 341 So.2d 203 (Fla. 4th DCA, opinion filed February 11, 1977).

REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.

DOWNEY and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

351 So. 2d 1047, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 22504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pinkney-v-state-fladistctapp-1977.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack