Tukes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tukes v. State

434 So. 2d 39, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20878

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 8, 1983·No. No. AN-189·Published

Opinion

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Appellant seeks review of his conviction and sentence for the offense of grand theft. We do not address the contention that Fla. [40] Const. Art. I, § 12, and Swartz v. State, 316 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 333 So.2d 465 (Fla.1976), require that an arrest warrant issue only upon a sworn written statement of probable cause. The circumstances of the present case permit a warrantless arrest pursuant to § 901.15(2), Florida Statutes, and any error in the issuance of the arrest warrant would therefore be harmless.

The order appealed is affirmed.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

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

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Appellant seeks review of his conviction and sentence for the offense of grand theft. We do not address the contention that Fla. [40] Const. Art. I, § 12, and Swartz v. State, 316 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 333 So.2d 465 (Fla.1976), require that an arrest warrant issue only upon a sworn written statement of probable cause. The circumstances of the present case permit a warrantless arrest pursuant to § 901.15(2), Florida Statutes, and any error in the issuance of the arrest warrant would therefore be harmless.

The order appealed is affirmed.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

Tukes v. State, 434 So. 2d 39, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20878 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

434 So. 2d 39 (Tukes v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related