Case ID: so2d_687/html/0851-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HARRIS, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Deidre Michelle HUNT, Appellee.
    No. 96-1036.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Jan. 3, 1997.
    Rehearing Denied Feb. 10, 1997.
    Robert A Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kellie A. Nielan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
    Carey Haughwout of Tierney & Haughw-out, West Palm Beach, for Appellee.
   HARRIS, Judge.

Deidre Michelle Hunt was permitted to withdraw her plea, and as a result the trial court suppressed statements she made to law enforcement subsequent to her plea. We affirm the court’s order which prohibits the State from introducing such statements during its case in chief. However, such statements may become admissible for the purpose of impeachment. See Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222, 91 S.Ct. 643, 28 L.Ed.2d 1 (1971) (a statement which was inadmissible in the prosecution’s case in chief because it was obtained before defendant was advised of his right to remain silent, but which otherwise satisfied legal standards of trustworthiness, was properly usable for impeachment purposes to attack the credibility of the defendant’s trial testimony). See also Washington v. State, 432 So.2d 44 (Fla.1983) (defendant’s otherwise inadmissible statements could be used in rebuttal after he testified in his own defense).

AFFIRMED.

COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.