Ranglin v. State, 36 Fla. L. Weekly D561 (Fla. 4th DCA Mar 16, 2011): Defense Appeal, Reversed – This is yet another Voir Dire cause/peremptory challenge case. This is short and to the point and clearly points out what you, as an attorney, must do to preserve an error by the court that disallows a requested challenge for cause.
Hentz v. State, 36 Fla. L. Weekly D568 (Fla. 4th DCA Mar 16, 2011): Defense Appeal denial of motion to suppress, Reversed – While preparing to interview a co-defendant at a police department interview room, the co-defendant made a call to the defendant. The interview had not begun, the co-defendant was alone in the room, and was told he was free to leave. There was no visible recording equipment in the room. The conversation was recorded by video and audio equipment that law enforcement knew could pick up both sides of telephone conversation. Conversation of defendant during telephone call was used to find evidence of crime and defendant was ultimately found guilty of battery. Denial of motion to suppress was reversed because law enforcement violated Florida’s Security of Communication Act, s. 934, Fla. Stat. Note: Violation of this act is a third degree felony.
Montcrieffe a/k/a Foster v. State, 36 Fla. L. Weekly D565 (Fla. 4th DCA Mar 16, 2011): Defense Appeal, Reversed – Escape case dealing with extra-jurisdictional arrest powers or lack thereof.