Rojas v. State
This text of 412 So. 2d 71 (Rojas 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.
Opinion
Rafael ROJAS, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
*72 Paul Morris and Stephen H. Rosen, Miami, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Diane Zimmer Leeds, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HENDRY, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Adhering to this state's unequivocal rules that any reference before the jury to the defendant's declination to answer police questioning after being given Miranda warnings is constitutionally impermissible, see, e.g., Bennett v. State, 316 So.2d 41 (Fla. 1975); Peterson v. State, 405 So.2d 997 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Barnes v. State, 375 So.2d 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); and that a timely motion for mistrial directed to the reference is all that is required to make the error of the reference reversible without regard to consideration of its harm to the defendant when measured against the other evidence in the case, see, e.g., Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla. 1978); Willinsky v. State, 360 So.2d 760 (Fla. 1978); Shannon v. State, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1976); Bennett v. State, supra; Peterson v. State, supra (and cases collected therein); we reverse the defendant's conviction and remand the cause for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
412 So. 2d 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rojas-v-state-fladistctapp-1982.