BELL V. STATE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JULY TERM, A.D. 2001 ARNOLD BELL, ** Appellant, ** vs. ** CASE NO. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ** LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. Appellee. 3D00-3562 99-890 ** Opinion filed December 26, 2001. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Richard Payne, Judge. Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before JORGENSON, and RAMIREZ, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge. RAMIREZ, J. Arnold Bell appeals his conviction and sentences for four counts of sexual battery on a child less than twelve years of age, and four counts of lewd, lascivious or indecent assault on a child under sixteen years of age. We affirm. Bell first asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress a videotaped statement because he was not made aware that his statement was being videotaped. He relies on Robinson v. State, 535 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), which suppressed a videotaped statement. However, as explained in Bedoya v. State, 779 So. 2d 574, 579-80 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), in Robinson, the defendant had agreed to speak with officers as long as her attorney was present. the officers began the When the attorney was late, interview without him and upon arrival denied him admission into the interview room. with Bedoya that a defendant does not have a his We agree reasonable expectation of privacy in a police interview room. Id. at 579. We also affirm the trial court s denial of the motion to dismiss the amended complaint because the state showed clearly and convincingly that it had exhausted all reasonable means of narrowing the time frames alleged in the information. See Dell Orfano v. State, 616 So. 2d 33, 35 (Fla. 1993). Finally, we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to convict Bell of sexual battery as charged in Count Three of the amended information. Affirmed. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
