Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1997

Mikell v. State

Mikell v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided October 1, 1997 · Cope, Goderich, Shevin
699 So. 2d 843; 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11116; 1997 WL 600300 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Mikell v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm defendant’s conviction. Based on the record before the trial court, we hold that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to suppress. See Escobar v. State, 699 So.2d 984 (Fla. 1997); Savage v. State, 588 So.2d 975 (Fla. 1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 943, 112 S.Ct. 1493, 117 L.Ed.2d 634 (1992); McNamara v. State, 357 So.2d 410 (Fla. 1978). The “trial court’s decision was based on competent substantial evi-*844denee.” Escobar v. State, 699 So.2d 988, 992-93 (Fla. 1997).

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.