From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lusk v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 27, 1979
367 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

Summary

In Lusk v. State of Florida, 367 So.2d 1088 (Fla.App. 1979) the practice of compelling a defendant to speak in court for the purpose of allowing a witness to identify defendant's voice was adjudged non-violative of fifth amendment principles.

Summary of this case from United States v. Williams

Opinion

No. 77-1287.

February 27, 1979.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr., J.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Kurt Marmar, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Margarita Esquiroz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HENDRY and SCHWARTZ, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), Associate Judge.


Rejecting the defendant Lusk's sole contention on appeal, we hold that the prosecutor's request that the defendant speak so that a witness then on the stand could identify his voice, was not an improper comment on an exercise of his constitutional right against self-incrimination. Although the request was made while the jury was present, and although Lusk did not himself testify, the cases cited by the defendant, e.g., Gordon v. State, 104 So.2d 524 (Fla. 1958), have utterly no application to this situation. Lusk's fifth amendment rights were simply not involved at all, because the privilege of "silence" does not extend to nor include the furnishing of physical, non-testimonial evidence such as the revelation of the sound of one's voice. United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 93 S.Ct. 764, 35 L.Ed.2d 67 (1973); United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967); Parkin v. State, 238 So.2d 817 (Fla. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 974, 91 S.Ct. 1189, 28 L.Ed.2d 322 (1971); Joseph v. State, 316 So.2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Boyer v. State, 182 So.2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 913, 87 S.Ct. 2118, 18 L.Ed.2d 1353 (1967); Higgins v. Wainwright, 424 F.2d 177 (5th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 905, 91 S.Ct. 145, 27 L.Ed.2d 142 (1970); Springer v. State, 372 N.E.2d 466, 472 (Ind. App. 1978); Doye v. State, 16 Md. App. 511, 299 A.2d 117 (1973).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Lusk v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 27, 1979
367 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

In Lusk v. State of Florida, 367 So.2d 1088 (Fla.App. 1979) the practice of compelling a defendant to speak in court for the purpose of allowing a witness to identify defendant's voice was adjudged non-violative of fifth amendment principles.

Summary of this case from United States v. Williams
Case details for

Lusk v. State

Case Details

Full title:BOBBY EARL LUSK, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Feb 27, 1979

Citations

367 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

Citing Cases

United States v. Williams

Several state courts have addressed the precise issue joined in the action sub judice. In Lusk v. State of…

State v. Neville

Loveless v. State, 592 P.2d 1206 (Alaska 1979). It is generally accepted that real or physical evidence such…