Brancaccio v. State, 4D99-1100.
| Decision Date | 22 November 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D99-1100.,4D99-1100. |
| Parties | Victor BRANCACCIO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Roy Black and Christine M. Ng of Black, Srebnick & Kornspan, P.A., Miami, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marrett W. Hanna, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
The principal issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in admitting a confession into evidence. Our review of the record discloses that there was evidence that this juvenile's confession was voluntarily given. The police administered Miranda warnings before actual questioning began. His age, intelligence, education, and background support the trial court's finding that he had the mental capacity to understand what he was doing and that his waiver of Miranda rights was knowing and voluntary. The record supports the finding that the police did not use any improper coercion in obtaining the confession, that they did not promise him anything in exchange for the confession.1 While his parents were not notified until after the confession, and he did ask if they had been called before he confessed, the facts support the trial court's finding that he voluntarily confessed despite their absence. He executed a written waiver form before actual questioning began.
Ultimately the question whether a confession is voluntary presents a legal issue to an appellate court, one that is determined de novo under federal constitutional principles. See Miller v. Fenton, 474 U.S. 104, 109, 106 S.Ct. 445, 88 L.Ed.2d 405 (1985)
(); Ramirez v. State, 739 So.2d 568, 575 (Fla.1999) (), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1131, 120 S.Ct. 970, 145 L.Ed.2d 841 (2000); W.M. v. State, 585 So.2d 979 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (same). Applying these standards, the confession survives appellate constitutional scrutiny.
For a juvenile's confession, the relevant circumstances include: (a) the manner in which the police administered Miranda rights, (b) the juvenile's age, experience, education, background and intelligence, (c) whether the juvenile had an opportunity to speak with his/her parents before confessing, and (d) whether the juvenile executed a written waiver of the Miranda rights prior to making the confession. Ramirez, 739 So.2d at 575-578. We have considered all these factors but will belabor only the following.
In this case, defendant inquired (before the waiver of rights was given) as to whether his parents had been notified. The police responded by saying: "it's being taken care of."2 In fact the police had no intention of calling his parents, for fear they might disturb evidence at the boy's home. We recognize that:
"[i]t is simply inappropriate for the police to make a representation intended to lull a young defendant into a false sense of security and calculated to delude him as to his true position at the very moment that the Miranda warnings are about to be administered."
Ramirez, 739 So.2d at 577. In this instance, however, there was no such police conduct. We do agree with defense counsel's argument that the police were less than completely honest in their response to this inquiry. Nevertheless, the audio tape supports the finding that in substance defendant did not actually ask for his parents to be present and that he voluntarily confessed anyway.3 We have concluded from our own review of the audiotape that this particular disingenuousness did not affect the voluntariness of the waiver and confession.4
As for defendant's claim of error in the jury learning that the court had denied his pretrial motion to suppress the confession, we conclude that there has been no showing of error. The issue as to whether police have complied with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Luna-Martinez v. State
...a legal issue to an appellate court, one that is determined de novo under federal constitutional principles." Brancaccio v. State, 773 So.2d 582, 583 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). B. The Legality of Consent Although warrantless entries of dwellings are generally forbidden, see Payton v. New York, 44......
-
JG v. State
...than factual question." Ramirez, 739 So.2d at 575. Therefore, we have de novo review of these legal issues. See Brancaccio v. State, 773 So.2d 582, 583 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). The following pertinent facts surrounding Appellant's receiving the Miranda rights and giving an oral confession were ......
-
State v. Herrera
...they could not arrange it, did not render Miranda waiver involuntary under the totality of the circumstances); Brancaccio v. State, 773 So.2d 582, 584 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding, in a case where police lied in response to juvenile's question about whether his parents had been notified, th......
-
Calder v. State
...to the trial court's conclusions regarding voluntariness. This is a question of law subject to de novo review. Brancaccio v. State, 773 So.2d 582, 583 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Here, the totality of the circumstances shows that Calder's reinitiation of the interrogation and waiver of his previou......