State v. Deck

705 So. 2d 566, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 65, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 80, 1998 WL 31918
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJanuary 29, 1998
DocketNo. 85652
StatusPublished

This text of 705 So. 2d 566 (State v. Deck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Deck, 705 So. 2d 566, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 65, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 80, 1998 WL 31918 (Fla. 1998).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We review Deck v. State, 653 So.2d 435 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), which expressly and directly conflicts with State v. Owen, 696 So.2d 715 (Fla.1997). We have jurisdiction. Art. Y, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

In Owen we held that police in Florida need not ask clarifying questions if a defendant makes only an equivocal or ambiguous request to terminate an interrogation after having validly waived his or her Miranda1 rights. In a decision which predated Owen, the court below held that an equivocal request to terminate interrogation required the police to either seek clarification or cease the interrogation. Accordingly, we quash the decision below and remand the case for further proceedings.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING and WELLS, JJ., and GRIMES, Senior Justice, concur. ANSTEAD, J., concurs in result only. KOGAN, C.J., dissents.

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

Related

Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (Supreme Court, 1966)
Deck v. State
653 So. 2d 435 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
State v. Owen
696 So. 2d 715 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
705 So. 2d 566, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 65, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 80, 1998 WL 31918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-deck-fla-1998.