State v. Marchena

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Marchena

663 So. 2d 685, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12435, 1995 WL 704729

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 1, 1995·No. No. 95-328·Published

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

The order suppressing evidence is affirmed. However, the trial court erred in dismissing the case in conjunction with granting the motion to suppress where no motion to dismiss was pending. See State v. Leyva, 599 So.2d 691 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Therefore, that portion of the suppression order dismissing the charge is stricken. The cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED; REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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

COBB, Judge.

The order suppressing evidence is affirmed. However, the trial court erred in dismissing the case in conjunction with granting the motion to suppress where no motion to dismiss was pending. See State v. Leyva, 599 So.2d 691 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Therefore, that portion of the suppression order dismissing the charge is stricken. The cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED; REMANDED.

DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

State v. Marchena, 663 So. 2d 685, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12435, 1995 WL 704729 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

663 So. 2d 685 (State v. Marchena) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related