Case Name: Maria Consuelo ESPINOSA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1990-04-03
Citations: 561 So. 2d 597
Docket Number: No. 88-918
Parties: Maria Consuelo ESPINOSA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before HUBBART, COPE and LEVY, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 561
Pages: 597–597

Head Matter:
Maria Consuelo ESPINOSA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 88-918.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
April 3, 1990.
Rehearing Denied June 22, 1990.
Stephen J. Finta, Ft. Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Joan L. Greenberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, COPE and LEVY, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We conclude that there was probable cause to arrest the defendant; that the trial court correctly denied the motion to suppress the defendant's post-Miranda statements; and that there was ample proof of the corpus delicti. See Thomas v. State, 531 So.2d 708, 711 (Fla.1988).
Affirmed.
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).