Opinion

Brown v. State

  • 744 So. 2d 1254
  • 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 15634
  • 1999 WL 1062507
Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
Nov 24, 1999
Status
Published
On the bench
Cope, Nesbitt, Sorondo
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 0.7%

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a proceeding under Anders v. California in which the appellant has submitted a pro se brief and the State has filed an answer brief. Appellant first contends that his taped statement should have been suppressed because he had taken pain medication several hours before he gave it. The trial court rejected this claim after hearing testimony from the detective who took the statement, the appellant, and listening to the tape. We affirm on authority of Burns v. State, 584 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).

Assuming appellant’s second point was properly preserved for appellate review, the trial court properly overruled the appellant’s objection to the admission of the bullet shell casing into evidence. The chain of custody was sufficiently established and there was no indication of prob *1255 able tampering. See Dodd v. State, 537 So.2d 626 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).

Affirmed.

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.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.