State v. Garcia, 82-1143
| Decision Date | 26 April 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-1143,82-1143 |
| Citation | 431 So.2d 651 |
| Parties | The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Juan GARCIA, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Calvin L. Fox, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
Bennett D. Fultz and Carlos Megias, Miami, for appellee.
Before HENDRY, BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
The state appeals the trial court's order suppressing evidence seized from defendant Garcia's home without a warrant. At the suppression hearing, police officers testified that during surveillance of the house, they observed a suspect enter Garcia's home and pursued him. The state argued that the warrantless entry was lawful because the police were "in hot pursuit." Testimony offered by the defendant contradicted the state's position. In his deposition, one officer stated that he saw no one outside the house. Two occupants of the house testified that only police ran inside. Before granting the motion to suppress, the court indicated it was "not even convinced that they were chasing a person...."
On a motion to suppress, the trial court is the trier of both fact and law. Cameron v. State, 112 So.2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959). The credibility of the witnesses and the weight of evidence are matters within the province of the trial judge, Reynolds v. State, 222 So.2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), whose determinations concerning questions of fact must be accepted by appellate courts if the record supports the findings. State v. Battleman, 374 So.2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Consequently, the trial court's resolution of conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal. State v. Thomas, 212 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968).
Because we find support in the record for the trial court's decision, we affirm.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gonzalez v. State
...Dooley v. State, 501 So.2d 18, 18-19 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); State v. Stephens, 441 So.2d 171, 171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); State v. Garcia, 431 So.2d 651, 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).3 The above-stated officer so testified below (R.348). Mrs. Gonzalez, on the other hand, gave a different version of thi......
-
State v. Paul
...(5th Cir.1971). See also Rodriquez v. State, 436 So.2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), rev. denied, 447 So.2d 888 (Fla.1984); State v. Garcia, 431 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Bowles v. State, 381 So.2d 326 (Fla. 5th DCA ...
-
State v. Guerra
...to support the findings. Consequently, the trial court's resolution of the evidence will not be disturbed on appeal. State v. Garcia, 431 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Sarno v. State, 424 So.2d 829 (Fla. 3d DCA), pet. for rev. denied, 434 So.2d 888 (Fla.1983). Affirmed. JORGENSON, Judge, di......
-
State v. Lopez, 89-987
...18 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); State v. Guerra, 455 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), review denied, 461 So.2d 114 (Fla.1985); State v. Garcia, 431 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); State v. Favaloro, 424 So.2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); State v. Melendez, 392 So.2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); State v. Battlema......
-
Appellate standards of review.
...446 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 1984) (jury); Clegg v. Chipola Aviation, Inc., 458 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (nonjury); State v. Garcia, 431 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (motion to suppress evidentiary If the evidence presented below is undisputed, and the factual finding is merely an inferenc......