History
  • No items yet
midpage
Harris v. State
342 So. 2d 97
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1977
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment of conviction based upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of carrying a concealed firearm.

It is appellant’s contention that he is entitled to a reversal on the grounds: (1) that the evidence failed to establish to the exclusion of and beyond every reasonable doubt the element of concealment, and (2) that appellant’s statements, while in jail, to a co-defendant who was acting under a promise of immunity from the State, should have been suppressed pursuant to the exclusionary rule corollary to the Fourth Amendment.

We have carefully considered the points on appeal in the light of the briefs and arguments of counsel and have concluded that reversible error has not been shown. Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 408, 17 L.Ed.2d 374 (1966), reh. den. 386 U.S. 940, 951, 87 S.Ct. 970, 17 L.Ed.2d 880; Spinkellink v. State, 313 So.2d 666 (Fla.1975); Grant v. State, 171 So.2d 361 (Fla.1965); State v. Sellers, 281 So.2d 397 (Fla.2d DCA 1973).

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Harris v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Feb 1, 1977
Citation: 342 So. 2d 97
Docket Number: No. 76-386
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.