State v. Olson

Florida Circuit Courts

State v. Olson

27 Fla. Supp. 2d 117

CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida

DecidedFebruary 26, 1988

DocketCase No. 85-276-AC (County Court Case No. 01885ML)

StatusPublished

This text of 27 Fla. Supp. 2d 117 (State v. Olson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits 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. Olson, 27 Fla. Supp. 2d 117 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

KORNBLUM, J.

After a traffic stop, Defendant/Appellee, in response to a question by the officer, said he had been drinking. Upon motion the trial court suppressed the statement.

At trial, the Court denied the State’s Motion for a Continuance and to extend the speedy trial period so that it could appeal the Order of Suppression. The Court then dismissed the case for lack of prosecution. This appeal followed.

We reversed based upon the rationale of Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 104 S.Ct. 3138, 82 L.Ed.2d 317 (1984) on the issue of Miranda warnings and on the authority of State v. Jenkins, 389 So.2d 971 (Fla. 1980) and Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972) on the issue of denial of the State’s request for an extension.

Remanded for proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

KORNBLUM, J.

After a traffic stop, Defendant/Appellee, in response to a question by the officer, said he had been drinking. Upon motion the trial court suppressed the statement.

At trial, the Court denied the State’s Motion for a Continuance and to extend the speedy trial period so that it could appeal the Order of Suppression. The Court then dismissed the case for lack of prosecution. This appeal followed.

We reversed based upon the rationale of Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 104 S.Ct. 3138, 82 L.Ed.2d 317 (1984) on the issue of Miranda warnings and on the authority of State v. Jenkins, 389 So.2d 971 (Fla. 1980) and Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972) on the issue of denial of the State’s request for an extension.

Remanded for proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 Fla. Supp. 2d 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-olson-flacirct-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack