Case Name: Carl MULLINGS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1984-06-26
Citations: 452 So. 2d 1010
Docket Number: No. 82-2390
Parties: Carl MULLINGS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before HUBBART, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 452
Pages: 1010–1010

Head Matter:
Carl MULLINGS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 82-2390.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
June 26, 1984.
Rehearing Denied July 23, 1984.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Diane Leeds, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Having reviewed the record we conclude that the trial court did not err in declining to suppress the defendant's incul-patory statements to the investigating officers. At most the record indicates that although the defendant may have requested that the interrogation cease (and his request was certainly not so interpreted by the officers), he thereafter signed a rights-waiver form (his second) and continued with the interrogation.
The imposition of three consecutive minimum mandatory sentences was error. We note, however, that in imposing them the trial court was without the benefit of Palmer v. State, 438 So.2d 1 (Fla.1983). The three consecutive minimum mandatory sentences are reduced to one.
Affirmed as modified.