District Court of Appeal of Florida March 27, 2002, No. 3D01-2704 (Augustyn v. State)

PER CURIAM.

Contrary to the appellant’s argument advanced on appeal, the trial court properly denied his motion to suppress his oral incriminating statements where such statements were made during a consensual encounter with the police and not during the course of a custodial interrogation. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966); Caso v. State, 624 So.