Has the state appellate court decided an important Miranda rights question in a way that conflicts with the relevant decisions of this Court as determined in Westover v. U.S., decided with Miranda v. Arizona, and/or Mathis v. United States, and/or Brewer v. Williams?

No question identified. : ‘ : ConsTitidiona! Question . Has the state appeluté cour? decided an imporTant Miranda. righIs guestion in a Way Tha? comets with The relevant decisions) oF This CourT as cbeTermned in_Wesfeaver V_UL.8., deuded with Miranda Vv Arizona, andfor Matlv3 Vv. umted states, andfor Brewer v. Wiliams ? OR Was The s%kle appellate cour? decided an imporTanT consti Tiitional-Federal Miranda righT6 guesTion in a way that Peli tener being remeved beth sn time and place From his original surrounding and Taken inte custody by a second agency authoriTy and questioned about a. diferent oFFense From what he 1's in cudstidy For ‘was part of a Siigle continuing session of sTérregaTion and the ofFicer(s) aid noT have h re-advise petitioner of his Miranda rights" conrhels with The relevant Aecisson¢3) oF This court as cbe7ermined in Westver UV U3, beciked with Miranda Vv. Anzeha, Mathys V_t.3,, antler Brewer V. Wwihhams.? Thar held 1 the eFFecT Thal iF an accuse is presented wiTh a difFerenT case, af Ter being Tatten into Custody by a second agency axThari'ty, removed both in time and place From his original burrounding, From whaT he 13 in custedy For he must be adequately be advise oF his Miranda righT3 before being guesticned. 2. Parties Ashley Moody, state AT iorney General oF Florida oo | 3