Case ID: fla-supp-2d_33/html/0130-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BROWN v STATE OF FLORIDA
    Case No. 88-1043-AC (County Court Case No. 32924-87)
    Fifth Judicial Circuit, Marion County
    March 28, 1989
    APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    Flem K. Whited, III., Whited & Johnson, for appellant.
    S. Ray Gill, State Attorney and Steve Rothenburg, Assistant State Attorney, for appellee.
    Before McNEAL, PETERSON, TOMBRINK, JJ.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. The trial judge correctly instructed the jury regarding defendant’s refusal to submit to an approved breath test that:

When a person is suspected of committing the offense of driving or operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent his normal faculties are impaired and refuses to take an approved chemical test, such a fact may be shown in evidence as a circumstances from which guilt may be inferred.
Now, while evidence of refusal to take a chemical test does not raise a presumption of guilty, it is a circumstances which the jury may consider along with all the other evidence and circumstances in this case.

See Fla. Stat. 316.1932(l)(a) (1987), South Dakota v Neville, 459 U.S. 553, 103 S.Ct. 916, 74 L.Ed.2d 748 (1983), Minor v Williams, 640 F.Supp. 360 (M.D. Tenn 1985).