From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Jones

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jan 26, 2000
763 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

holding failure of law enforcement officials to inform a suspect in custody what offenses he or she would be questioned about did not affect the suspect's decision to waive the Fifth Amendment privilege in any constitutionally significant manner citing Colorado v. Spring, 479 U.S. 564, 576, 107 S.Ct. 851, 93 L.Ed.2d 954

Summary of this case from Barger v. State

Opinion

No. 99-0564

Opinion filed January 26, 2000 JANUARY TERM 2000

Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Ronald J. Rothschild, Judge; L.T. No. 98-11756CF10A, 98-13790CF10A, 98-15994CF10A, 98-16403CF10A.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Leslie T. Campbell, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Gene Reibman, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.


The trial court granted the defendant's motion to suppress solely based on its conclusion that he should have been given a second set of Miranda warnings before he was questioned on unrelated cases. This conclusion was erroneous. The failure of law enforcement officials to inform a suspect in custody of the subject matter of the interrogation, i.e., what offenses he or she will be questioned about, does not affect the suspect's decision to waive the Fifth Amendment privilege in any constitutionally significant manner. See Colorado v. Spring, 479 U.S. 564, 576 (1987). Thus, where a suspect is brought into custody on one criminal charge and waives his or her Miranda rights, police officials may question the suspect about unrelated crimes without readministering the Miranda rights. Id. at 576; see Herring v. Dugger, 528 So.2d 1176, 1178 (Fla. 1988) (stating that "a warning and waiver of rights given following the arrest for a criminal offense is sufficient to cover any later statements to a law enforcement officer concerning other criminal offenses"). Accordingly, the trial court's order is reversed and this case remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DELL, GUNTHER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Jones

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jan 26, 2000
763 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

holding failure of law enforcement officials to inform a suspect in custody what offenses he or she would be questioned about did not affect the suspect's decision to waive the Fifth Amendment privilege in any constitutionally significant manner citing Colorado v. Spring, 479 U.S. 564, 576, 107 S.Ct. 851, 93 L.Ed.2d 954

Summary of this case from Barger v. State
Case details for

State v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellant, v. ANTONIO T. JONES, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jan 26, 2000

Citations

763 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Brooks v. State

SeeMcKenzie v. State , 125 So. 3d 906, 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (holding that " Almeida does not require the…

Barger v. State

Therefore, the officers were not required to answer the question before continuing the interview. See, e.g.,…