Dyer v. State: Staring at the wall for a while before making an incriminating statement is not good for your legal health: In Jump v. State, 983 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), State v. Lebron, 979 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), and State v. Pitts, 936 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), the courts have held that, where a defendant makes a statement after receiving a Miranda warning which confirms an earlier voluntary statement made before Miranda warnings were given, the post-Miranda statement is admissible if the police officer did not engage in a calculated two-step strategy to undermine the requirements of Miranda.
Moral of the story: keep your trap shut when in custody.
State v. Tabuteau: A motion to vacate a conviction based on a deportation order was granted by the trial court but reversed by the 3rd DCA because the conviction was not the sole basis for the deportation order. Judge Thornton takes the hit for trying to do the right thing.
Del Valle v. State: Speaking of not speaking, when you are smart enough to invoke Miranda you run the risk of spending the rest of your life in jail when you reinitiate conversation with the police and confess to murder. Duh.