Court Opinion

ID: 7568910
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 06:10:30.799859+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:24:19.637806
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
We reject the defendant’s challenges to the statements and confessions admitted against him, finding that he was not initially under arrest or invalidly taken into custody, see Roman v. State, 475 So.2d 1228 (Fla.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1090, 106 S.Ct. 1480, 89 L.Ed.2d 734 (1986); State v. Dodd, 396 So.2d 1205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and cases cited at 1207, approved, 419 So.2d 333 (Fla.1982); compare Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200, 99 S.Ct. 2248, 60 L.Ed.2d 824 (1979); Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 95 S.Ct. 2254, 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975), and that, when they became required, Miranda warnings were correctly administered. See Kennedy v. State, 455 So.2d 351 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1197, 105 S.Ct. 981, 83 L.Ed.2d 983 (1985); Waterhouse v. State, 429 So.2d 301 (Fla. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 977, 104 S.Ct. 415, 78 L.Ed.2d 352 (1983).
Affirmed.