Opinion

Brown v. State

33 Fla. Supp. 2d 130

Court: Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida
Filed: Mar 28, 1989
Status: Published
On the bench: McNeal, Peterson, Tombrink
Cited by: 0 cases
Authority: More cited than 18.9%

The opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. The trial judge correctly instructed the jury regarding defendant’s refusal to submit to an approved breath test that:

When a person is suspected of committing the offense of driving or operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcoholic beverages to the extent his normal faculties are impaired and refuses to take an approved chemical test, such a fact may be shown in evidence as a circumstances from which guilt may be inferred.

Now, while evidence of refusal to take a chemical test does not raise *131 a presumption of guilty, it is a circumstances which the jury may consider along with all the other evidence and circumstances in this case.

See Fla. Stat. 316.1932(l)(a) (1987), South Dakota v Neville, 459 U.S. 553 , 103 S.Ct. 916 , 74 L.Ed.2d 748 (1983), Minor v Williams, 640 F.Supp. 360 (M.D. Tenn 1985).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.