TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

State Court Says Tampa Police Form Is Unclear

ADVERTISEMENT

By ELAINE SILVESTRINI

The Tampa Tribune

Published: October 8, 2008

In a decision that could imperil untold numbers of criminal prosecutions in Tampa, the state Supreme Court has ruled that the form used by city police to warn suspects of their rights was defective.

The court, in a 6-1 ruling, held that statements given by suspects after police administered the flawed Miranda warning can't be used against them. The decision overturns the weapons conviction of Kevin DeWayne Powell.

Officials on Tuesday could not estimate how many other cases might be affected.

The old Tampa police form told suspects they had the right to talk to a lawyer before questioning but didn't mention that suspects also have a right to have a lawyer present during questioning.

The court wrote that the decision may not be applied retroactively to cases that are final. It was not immediately known, though, whether that means the ruling applies to defendants who have been sentenced or just those whose appeals have been exhausted. One local lawyer, Tom Scarritt, said "final" means defendants have pleaded guilty or been convicted.

Even if the decision is not applied retroactively to cases, "That could still be a large number of cases," Scarritt said. "It's a big deal."

Pam Bondi, spokeswoman for the Hillsborough State Attorney's Office, would not comment other than to say, "We're discussing appellate options with the attorney general."

Police began using a revised form last year after state appeals courts overturned convictions based on the old form.

A Tampa police spokeswoman could not say Tuesday how long the department used the old form, but court rulings suggest it dates at least to 2005.

The state Supreme Court ruling, by Chief Justice Peggy Quince, states the Miranda rights form was "misleading" and "suggests to a reasonable person in the suspect's shoes that he or she can only consult with an attorney before questioning; there is nothing in that statement that suggests the attorney can be present during the actual questioning."

The lone dissenting justice, Charles T. Wells, wrote that the court's decision "will result in reversing the convictions of individuals who have confessed to crimes based upon a holding that is at most an extreme technical adherence to language and that has no connection with whether the person who confessed understood his or her rights."

Reporter Ray Reyes contributed to this report. Reporter Elaine Silvestrini can be reached at (813) 259-7837. Keyword: Miranda, to read the ruling.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT