From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. DeConingh

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 14, 1981
396 So. 2d 858 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

Opinion

No. 80-1812.

April 14, 1981.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Monroe County, Helio Gomez, J.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Paul Mendelson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Kurt Marmar, Miami, for appellee.

Before HUBBART, C.J., and BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.


We affirm the order entered by the trial court suppressing a blood sample taken from defendant to determine alcohol content following her admission to police that she had shot her husband. The taking of blood by police as a standard procedure in homicide cases without reasonable cause to believe the blood would lead to desired evidence has been condemned as a Fourth Amendment violation. Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 86 S.Ct. 1826, 16 L.Ed.2d 908 (1966). No justification for the intrusion appears from the circumstances of this case. See Jones v. State, 343 So.2d 921 (Fla.3d DCA), cert. denied, 352 So.2d 172 (Fla. 1977).

Defendant's cross-appeal of the suppression order insofar as it denied her motion to suppress "all tangible evidence" seized from her house is dismissed. State v. Clark, 384 So.2d 687 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).


Summaries of

State v. DeConingh

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 14, 1981
396 So. 2d 858 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
Case details for

State v. DeConingh

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT, v. SUZANNE DeCONINGH, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 14, 1981

Citations

396 So. 2d 858 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

Citing Cases

State v. Williams

Rule 9.130, which governs proceedings to review non-final orders, provides in subsection (a)(2) that…

State v. Suco

Although the defendant Suco has attempted to cross-appeal this ruling, he has since abandoned same as,…