# Hunter v. State

> Supreme Court of Florida · September 25, 2008 · 33 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 745

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9658204

## Case

- **Full name:** Jerone HUNTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Florida
- **Decided:** September 25, 2008
- **Citations:** 33 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 745; 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 745; 8 So. 3d 1052; 2008 Fla. LEXIS 1615
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Anstead
- **Judges:** Anstead, Bell, Cantero, Lewis, Pariente, Quince, Wells
- **Cited by:** 37 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9658204

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that defendant was not in custody where he was ordered .out of the house along with other people,“was told to put his hands on his head, and then was directed to sit on the sidewalk”; defendant was “asked if he would go with the police to answer some questions”; def…
- holding that interview was not custodial prior to the reading of the Miranda - 34 - warnings, in part, because the defendant was not a person of interest at the time he went to the police station, but had been identified as an acquaintance of a person who had already been take…
- holding that interview was not custodial prior to the reading of the Miranda warnings, in part, because the defendant was not a person of interest at the time he went to the police station, but had been identified as an acquaintance of a person who had already been taken into …
- holding that the defendant was not in custody where he was voluntarily driven to station by police, he was confronted with some evidence about another suspect, he was not handcuffed, and he was reminded several times that he could go home and officers would take him
- concluding that defendant was not in custody where he was asked to go to the station to answer some questions, he was told he did not have to go with police, and he was told at the station that he was free to leave and that he was not under’ arrest

## Opinion text

ANSTEAD, J.,
dissenting.
For the same reasons I have set out in my opinion in Smith v. State, 998 So.2d 516 (Fla.2008), I would remove appellate counsel for appellant, strike the briefs he has filed, and direct the trial court to appoint new counsel to proceed on appeal.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9658204. Public record. Not legal advice.