FABIO MANRIQUE IZAGUIRRE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
FABIO MANRIQUE IZAGUIRRE, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
816 So. 2d 172
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2002)
Caution
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The order revoking probation and the consequent sentence are reversed with directions to dismiss the proceeding because there is no competent non-hearsay evidence of the defendant’s guilt. See Blair v. State, 805 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Frazier v. State, 587 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); see also Phillips v. State, 816 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perez v. State, 980 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…nings, and his statements were properly admitted. See Oregon v. Bradshaw, 462 U.S. 1039, 103 S.Ct. 2830, 77 L.Ed.2d 405 (1983); Bassett v. State, 449 So. 2d 803 (Fla.1984); Bryan v. State, 947 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Compare Dixon v. State, 816 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (police rather than defendant reinitiated contact with the defendant). See generally Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). II. The defendant next contends that the trial court abused its discr…
-
Dixon v. State, 911 So. 2d 1260 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…nd convicted of charges of first degree murder with a firearm and grand theft auto. Dixon appeals only the conviction of first degree murder with a firearm. We affirm. This is the second appearance of this case before this court. In Dixon v. State, 816 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), we reversed Dixon’s first trial based upon the admission of a statement that violated his Miranda1 rights. The facts of this case are summarized in this court’s opinion in Dixon: On the Sunday afternoon in question, the victim…
-
Dieurold Louis v. State, 855 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…2d 751, 754 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). We review the trial judge’s application of the law to the court’s factual findings de novo. Id. [*255] Initially, we note that Miranda is implicated only where there is a custodial interrogation. See Dixon v. State, 816 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Here, we conclude that Louis was in custody. There are four factors which guide this determination: “(1) the manner in which the police summon the suspect for questioning; (2) the purpose, place, and manner of interrogation; (3)…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 537 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Blair v. State, 805 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Frazier v. State, 587 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Carroll Junior Phillips v. State, 816 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)