Case ID: so2d_438/html/0935-01.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

Carlos OSORIO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 82-1720.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Oct. 4, 1983.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Paul & Thomson and Samuel A. Terilli, Special Asst. Public Defenders, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Calianne P. Lantz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before HENDRY, HUBBART and JOR-GENSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress upon a holding that the evidence, while conflicting, was sufficient for the trial court to conclude that the defendant possessed a sufficient knowledge of the English language to give a valid consent.

We have considered the other issues raised by the appellant and find them to be without merit. See State v. Millwood, 430 So.2d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Login v. State, 394 So.2d 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

Affirmed.