State v. Jones

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Jones

219 So. 2d 712, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6195

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 4, 1969

DocketNo. 68-885

StatusPublished

This text of 219 So. 2d 712 (State v. Jones) 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

State v. Jones, 219 So. 2d 712, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6195 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants-appellees have moved to dismiss an appeal taken by the State of Florida pursuant to § 924.071 Fla.Stat. F.S.A. from an order suppressing a quantity of marijuana found in the possession of the defendants.

It is the appellees’ contentions that the appeal should be dismissed because § 924.-071, supra, accords the State of Florida unilateral right to prosecute a pretrial appeal from an order “quashing the search warrant or suppressing evidence obtained by search and seizure or suppressing a confession or admission made by the defendant”. Appellees argue that in conferring said right upon the State of Florida, but not upon the defendant, the state denies to the defendant due process of law, equal protection of the law and the right to a speedy trial.

We find appellees’ contentions to be without substantial merit; therefore, the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

Denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendants-appellees have moved to dismiss an appeal taken by the State of Florida pursuant to § 924.071 Fla.Stat. F.S.A. from an order suppressing a quantity of marijuana found in the possession of the defendants.

It is the appellees’ contentions that the appeal should be dismissed because § 924.-071, supra, accords the State of Florida unilateral right to prosecute a pretrial appeal from an order “quashing the search warrant or suppressing evidence obtained by search and seizure or suppressing a confession or admission made by the defendant”. Appellees argue that in conferring said right upon the State of Florida, but not upon the defendant, the state denies to the defendant due process of law, equal protection of the law and the right to a speedy trial.

We find appellees’ contentions to be without substantial merit; therefore, the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

Denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 So. 2d 712, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jones-fladistctapp-1969.