State v. Thomas
Decision Date | 30 July 1968 |
Docket Number | No. J--473,J--473 |
Citation | 212 So.2d 910 |
Parties | STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Clyde Arnold THOMAS, Jr., Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., David U. Tumin, Asst. Atty. Gen., and S. Thompson Tygart, Jr., Asst. State Atty., for appellant.
Mahon & Mahon, Jacksonville, for appellee.
This is an appeal from an order of the Criminal Court of Record, Duval County, Florida, suppressing evidence obtained from a blood alcohol test.
It appears that appellee was being prosecuted on an information charging manslaughter, in two counts, one charging culpable negligence in the operation of an automobile and the other count charging the appellee with driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquors, resulting in the death alleged.
Appellee made a motion to suppress the results of a blood alcohol test made on the appellee about two hours after the accident in question. The trial court entered its order holding that 'the evidence of the results of the alcoholic blood test are inadmissible by operation of Section 317.171, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and under the cases of Cooper v. State of Florida (Fla.), 183 So.2d 269, and Edwin Franklin Coffee, Jr. v. State of Florida (Fla.App., 205 So.2d 559), rendered December 14, 1967 * * *'
The State has appealed this order.
Subsequent to the oral arguments had before this Court in the case sub judice, the Supreme Court of Florida has reversed the decision of this court in the Coffee case, supra, by an opinion in which the Cooper case supra, was affirmed, by reference, and in which it appears that the fine points of distinction between the Cooper case and the Coffee case hinged upon the fact that the information obtained by the officer in the Cooper case was admittedly for the purpose of completing the accident report as required by Section F.S. 317.131, F.S.A., whereas in the Coffee case, the Supreme Court said there was no doubt that the accident report phase of the investigation had ended and that the blood test was being given to him (the defendant) in connection with the charge of manslaughter.
In the case sub judice, the facts are so closely aligned to the facts in both the Coffee case and Cooper case, that it is doubtful that this Court would have upset the decision of the trial court had he denied the defendant's motion to suppress. The State contends that there is no question but that the officer whose testimony is in question was through with his investigation for making the accident report as required by Section 317.131, and was proceeding on a new phase, namely, investigation for prosecution under the charges of manslaughter which were later filed. In fact, on direct and redirect examination of the officer, the appellant's contention is supported by the direct statement of such officer to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Lopez, 89-987
...4th DCA 1981); State v. Battleman, 374 So.2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Ponder v. State, 323 So.2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); State v. Thomas, 212 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968); Cameron v. State, 112 So.2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959); see also Stone v. State, 378 So.2d 765 (Fla.1979), cert. denied, 4......
-
State v. Brown, 91-474
...4th DCA 1981); State v. Battleman, 374 So.2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Ponder v. State, 323 So.2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); State v. Thomas, 212 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968); Cameron v. State, 112 So.2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959); see also Stone v. State, 378 So.2d 765 (Fla.1979), cert. denied, 4......
-
Kuklis v. Hancock, 28776 Summary Calendar.
...632; Mitchell v. State, Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1969, 227 So.2d 728; Timmons v. State, Fla.Dist. Ct.App.1968, 214 So.2d 11; State v. Thomas, Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1968, 212 So.2d 910; Cooper v. State, Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1966, 183 So.2d 269. Because the statute is in derogation of common law it is to be str......
-
Morrison v. Smith, 70--951
...appellate court ought not to interfere with such determination unless clearly erroneous or without evidentiary foundation. State v. Thomas, Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 910. ...