C. A. Fielland v. Fidelity and Casualty Company New York

This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the District Court in Nova v. State, 346 So.2d 1214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), which directly conflicts with Gerrard v. State, 345 So.2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); State v. Roman, 309 So.2d 12 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cert. dismissed 312 So.2d 761 (Fla.1975); and Sheff v. State, 301 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), affd 329 So.2d 270 (Fla.1976), which hold that, on a motion to suppress, the trial judges conclusions of fact come to the reviewing court clothed with a presumption of correctness, and in testing the accuracy of these conclusions, the appellate court must interpret the evidence and all reasonable deductions and inferences which may be drawn therefrom in the light most favorable to the trial judges conclusions.