Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

422 So. 2d 981

Docket Nos. AK-387 to AK-389.

Powers v. State

Michael L. POWERS, Robert Griggs and Roger Eugene Smith, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 17, 1982.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1982-11-17

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1985

8 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“the evidence [did] not show an arrest as of the date of administrative confinement for purposes of commencing the 180-day speedy trial time... .”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 436 So. 2d 416 - Lynn v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1982-11-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*982 David J. Busch, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellants.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Lawrence A. Kaden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Appellants, prison inmates, were discovered by prison officials with weapons on their persons, given Miranda warnings, interrogated, and placed in administrative confinement. Some three months thereafter, appellants were charged with and arrested for possession of a weapon by a State prisoner.

¶5Appellants moved for discharge, alleging that their rights to speedy trial pursuant to Rule 3.191(a)(1), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure (1981), had been violated in that more than 180 days had passed since they were given Miranda warnings and placed in administrative confinement. The trial court denied these motions. We conclude the evidence does not show an arrest as of the date of administrative confinement for purposes of commencing the 180-day speedy trial time and, accordingly, affirm.

¶6McCORD, BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

/422/so2d/981 · .json · Public domain