State v. Thomas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Thomas

332 So. 2d 87, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14382

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 18, 1976·No. No. AA-498·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

BOYER, Chief Judge.

By this interlocutory appeal review is sought of an order of the trial judge granting appellee’s motion to suppress certain evidence. The State urges that the order should be reversed because of the failure of the trial judge to recite therein his findings and reasons for issuance of the order, citing State v. Hysell, Fla.App.2nd 1973, 281 So.2d 417. Although such procedure is certainly desirable it is not a prerequisite to the legality of an order of suppression. It is axiomatic that orders of trial courts reach an appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness. With the exception of certain orders which are required by law to contain recitations of findings or reasons, if there is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain the order of the trial court the judge will be presumed to have properly based his order on that evidence.

Finding, as we do, that appellant has failed to demonstrate error in the manner alleged, this interlocutory appeal is, pursuant to Rule 4.2c FAR,

DISMISSED.

MILLS and McCORD, JJ., concur.

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

BOYER, Chief Judge.

By this interlocutory appeal review is sought of an order of the trial judge granting appellee’s motion to suppress certain evidence. The State urges that the order should be reversed because of the failure of the trial judge to recite therein his findings and reasons for issuance of the order, citing State v. Hysell, Fla.App.2nd 1973, 281 So.2d 417. Although such procedure is certainly desirable it is not a prerequisite to the legality of an order of suppression. It is axiomatic that orders of trial courts reach an appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness. With the exception of certain orders which are required by law to contain recitations of findings or reasons, if there is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain the order of the trial court the judge will be presumed to have properly based his order on that evidence.

Finding, as we do, that appellant has failed to demonstrate error in the manner alleged, this interlocutory appeal is, pursuant to Rule 4.2c FAR,

DISMISSED.

MILLS and McCORD, JJ., concur.

State v. Thomas, 332 So. 2d 87, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14382 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

332 So. 2d 87 (State v. Thomas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related