State v. Glover

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Glover

653 So. 2d 1145, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4661, 1995 WL 254423

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 3, 1995·No. No. 94-1628·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the record before us, we find that there is no basis to disturb the trial court’s findings and ruling on the motion to suppress. Owen v. State, 560 So.2d 207, 211 (Fla.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 855, 111 S.Ct. 152, 112 L.Ed.2d 118 (1990) (citing McNamara v. State, 357 So.2d 410, 412 (Fla.1978): “The ruling of the trial court on a motion to suppress comes to us clothed with a presumption of correctness and we must interpret the evidence and reasonable inference and deductions in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s ruling.”).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the record before us, we find that there is no basis to disturb the trial court’s findings and ruling on the motion to suppress. Owen v. State, 560 So.2d 207, 211 (Fla.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 855, 111 S.Ct. 152, 112 L.Ed.2d 118 (1990) (citing McNamara v. State, 357 So.2d 410, 412 (Fla.1978): “The ruling of the trial court on a motion to suppress comes to us clothed with a presumption of correctness and we must interpret the evidence and reasonable inference and deductions in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s ruling.”).

Affirmed.

State v. Glover, 653 So. 2d 1145, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4661, 1995 WL 254423 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

653 So. 2d 1145 (State v. Glover) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related