M. D. B. v. State, 74-1492
| Decision Date | 18 April 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 74-1492,74-1492 |
| Citation | 311 So.2d 399 |
| Parties | In the Interest of M. D. B., a child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Warner S. Olds, Public Defender, and William W. Herring, Asst. Public Defender, and Neil G. Frank, Legal Intern, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Anthony J. Golden, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Defendant was adjudicated a delinquent on charges of breaking and entering, and was committed to the State Division of Youth Services. The trial court denied defendant's motion to suppress his confession, and the juvenile appeals that denial. We agree with his contentions and reverse on the basis of testimony given at the suppression hearing by the arresting officer and the juvenile.
We do not consider defendant's contention that the officer promised him he could go home if he confessed, as the officer denies such a promise; however it is undisputed that the officer promised that the juvenile would not be charged with other offenses if he confessed:
The juvenile verified this:
'Q Did Officer Hurt discuss any other case with you?
'A Yes.
'Q Did he make any promises or tell you it would benefit you in any way concerning these other cases?
'A Yes.
'Q What did you say exactly if you recall?
'A Exactly, I don't know, but he told me there probably wouldn't be charges brought--'all I want to do is clear up the paper work'.'
It is basic that a confession, to be admissible, must
'not be extracted by any sort of threat or violence, nor be obtained by Any direct or implied promise, however slight, or by the exertion of any improper influence.' 13 Fla.Jur. Evidence § 248 (1957) (Emphasis added.)
A confessing defendant should be free from the influence of either hope or fear, and the confession should be excluded if the attending circumstances were calculated to delude the defendant or exert undue influence over him. Frazier v. State, 107 So.2d 16 (Fla.1958); Harrison v. State, 152 Fla. 86, 12 So.2d 307 (Fla.1943); State v. Chorpenning, 294 So.2d 54 (2d D.C.A.Fla.1974); Paulk v. State, 211 So.2d 591 (2d D.C.A.Fla.1968); Kraft v. State, 143 So.2d 863 (2d D.C.A.Fla1962), and Hooper v. State, 115 So.2d 769 (3d D.C.A.Fla.1959). In Lawton v. State, 152 Fla. 821 13 So.2d 211 (Fla.1943) a confession was held involuntary when the defendant confessed based on the understanding he would not be prosecuted.
There is no question but that the officer here made like promises to the 14 year old defendant in return for the confession. Although defendant's age does not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- State v. Persinger
-
State v. R.M.
...State, 107 So.2d 16 (Fla.1958); Bradley v. State, 356 So.2d 849 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 360 So.2d 1247 (Fla.1978); M.D.B. v. State, 311 So.2d 399 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 321 So.2d 555 (Fla.1975); Snipes v. State, 651 So.2d 108, 110-11 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Fillinger v. State, 349 ......
-
State v. Hall
...promise, inducement or threat is present in the record. See e. g., Freeman v. State, 527 S.W.2d 909 (Ark.1975); M.D.B. v. State, 311 So.2d 399 (Fla.Ct.App.1975); People v. Moore, 24 Ill.App.3d 1034, 322 N.E. 543 (1975); Lyter v. State, 2 Md.App. 654, 236 A.2d 432 (1968); People v. Pallister......
-
Bova v. State
...totality of the surrounding circumstances were calculated to delude the accused or to exert undue influence over him. M. D. B. v. State, 311 So.2d 399 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Jarriel v. State, 317 So.2d 141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). If the interrogator induces the accused to confess by using langua......