State v. Whitehead

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Whitehead

443 So. 2d 196, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25194

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 13, 1983

DocketNo. 82-2458

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 443 So. 2d 196 (State v. Whitehead) 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. Whitehead, 443 So. 2d 196, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25194 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Whitehead, contending that Section 316.-1932(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1982), which provides, inter alia, that:

“The refusal to submit to a chemical breath or urine test upon the request of a law enforcement officer as provided in this section shall be admissible into evidence in any criminal proceeding.”

unconstitutionally violates his privilege against self-incrimination, successfully moved in limine to prohibit the State from eliciting any testimony concerning, or commenting upon, the defendant’s refusal to submit to a test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood. The order granting the motion in limine is vacated upon the authority of South Dakota v. Neville, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 916, 74 L.Ed.2d 748 (1983), and State v. Sowers, 442 So.2d 239 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

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

PER CURIAM.

Whitehead, contending that Section 316.-1932(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1982), which provides, inter alia, that:

“The refusal to submit to a chemical breath or urine test upon the request of a law enforcement officer as provided in this section shall be admissible into evidence in any criminal proceeding.”

unconstitutionally violates his privilege against self-incrimination, successfully moved in limine to prohibit the State from eliciting any testimony concerning, or commenting upon, the defendant’s refusal to submit to a test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood. The order granting the motion in limine is vacated upon the authority of South Dakota v. Neville, — U.S. -, 103 S.Ct. 916, 74 L.Ed.2d 748 (1983), and State v. Sowers, 442 So.2d 239 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

443 So. 2d 196, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-whitehead-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack