Silling v. State, AD-255
| Decision Date | 11 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. AD-255,AD-255 |
| Citation | 414 So.2d 1182 |
| Parties | Lynn Pitts SILLING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Charles J. Kahn, Jr., of Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Mabie & Magie, Pensacola, for appellant.
Wallace E. Allbritton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
Appellant was convicted and sentenced for one count of burglary with intent to assault and for two counts of aggravated battery with a firearm. Appellant alleges error as to four points, one being that the trial court erred in allowing testimony regarding statements she allegedly made after invoking her right to counsel. We agree and reverse and remand for a new trial.
Deputy Wasden arrested appellant and immediately read her her Miranda rights. Appellant acknowledged her understanding of these rights and waived her right to remain silent. Deputy Wasden and defendant then proceeded to her apartment so she could make arrangements for her young son. Subsequently, while they were still at appellant's apartment, Deputy Wasden again advised her of her Miranda rights. She again indicated that she understood these rights and again waived her right to remain silent. Appellant then proceeded to explain to Deputy Wasden that she had gone to her husband's apartment to procure her son's clothes he had left there after a recent visit with his father. Appellant and her husband, Mark, were not divorced but had been living separately. Appellant knew that Mark had been living with another woman, Carla. Appellant then told Deputy Wasden that when she touched Mark's apartment door it came open. Accordingly, she proceeded into the apartment and into the bedroom, where she saw Mark and Carla lying nude in bed. Deputy Wasden then asked appellant if that was when she began firing. At this point, appellant said she did not want to answer anymore questions without conferring with an attorney. Deputy Wasden did not question appellant further.
Subsequently, Deputy Wasden took appellant to the county jail, where she was booked by Deputy Taylor. Deputy Wasden told Deputy Taylor that appellant had been given her Miranda rights. Deputy Taylor did not read appellant her Miranda rights nor did he apprise her of her right to counsel as required by Rule 3.111(c), Fla.R.Crim.P. However, Deputy Taylor asked appellant "why she did it?" At trial Deputy Taylor testified that appellant responded with something along the line of "I was tired of him messing me over." Appellan...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gonzalez v. State
...are easily distinguishable on their facts. See State v. Padron, 425 So.2d 644 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (continuous custody); Silling v. State, 414 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (continuous custody, same offense); Porter v. State, 410 So.2d 164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (continuous custody, same We hold......
-
Zeigler v. State
...in denying appellant's motion to suppress. Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981); Silling v. State, 414 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Compare, Barfield v. State, 402 So.2d 377 We have considered and find wholly without merit the state's contention that ou......
-
Williams v. State
...that the defendant had stated that he did not wish to answer further questions and requested a lawyer. See Silling v. State, 414 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Williams requests that we recede from Nettles v. State, 409 So.2d 85 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), to reverse the trial court's allowing "d......
-
Del Duca v. State, 80-253
...during interrogation, under the standard set forth in Edwards. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial. Silling v. State, 414 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). REVERSED AND OTT, C.J., and BOARDMAN, J., concur. ...