State v. McDonald

736 So. 2d 155, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9172, 1999 WL 462096
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. McDonald. Read the opinion of the Court — 785 So. 2d 640
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 9, 1999·No. No. 98-2220·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed. See State v. Peterson, 24 Fla. L. Weekly S288, — So.2d -, 1999 WL 424382 (Fla. June 17, 1999) (overruling Peterson v. State, 706 So.2d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), and, by implication, McNeely v. State, 690 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), Smith v. State, 637 So.2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), and St. Angelo v. State, 532 So.2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), insofar as these decisions require an affiant’s personal knowledge of a confidential informant’s reliability).

ALLEN, LAWRENCE, and BENTON, JJ., CONCUR.

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

State v. McDonald, 736 So. 2d 155, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9172, 1999 WL 462096 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

736 So. 2d 155 (State v. McDonald) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

St. Angelo v. State
532 So. 2d 1346 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Smith v. State
637 So. 2d 351 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
McNeely v. State
690 So. 2d 1337 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
State v. Peterson
739 So. 2d 561 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)
Peterson v. State
706 So. 2d 936 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)