Baker v. State, 4D01-1691.

Decision Date17 April 2002
Docket NumberNo. 4D01-1691.,4D01-1691.
Citation813 So.2d 1044
PartiesMichael Doreen BAKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and James W. McIntire, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marrett W. Hanna, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

FARMER, J.

The defendant pled no contest to the crimes of possession of cannabis less than 20 grams and possession of cocaine, reserving his right to appeal the trial court's ruling on his motion to suppress, which the state admits is dispositive to its case. We reverse the trial court's ruling and remand with instructions to vacate the conviction.

Officer Savickus noticed the defendant standing with another male in the front yard of a residential duplex, street number 602. The officer did not recognize the defendant as "somebody who hangs in this area." The owner of the duplex, also the owner of the two neighboring duplexes, street numbers 604 and 606, had authorized the police to arrest trespassers and had posted a "no trespassing" sign on the lawn of the middle duplex, unit 604. As Savickus drove his police car by, the defendant and the other male "seemed nervous," broke apart, and walked away. When Savickus approached the defendant, who had now left the property, and asked what he had been doing on the property, the defendant explained that he had stopped on the property to fix the button of his pants. Defendant stated that neither he nor the other male lived in the duplex residence and he did not know the people who lived at the property. With this information, Savickus arrested the defendant for trespassing. Savickus found cocaine and marijuana in the defendant's pocket. The trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress, ruling that there was probable cause to arrest the defendant for trespassing and, thus, the search incident to the arrest legal.

The trespass statute provides,

(1)(a) A person who, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters upon or remains in any property other than a structure or conveyance:
1. As to which notice against entering or remaining is given, either by actual communication to the offender or by posting, fencing, or cultivation as described in s. 810.011; or
2. If the property is the unenclosed curtilage of a dwelling and the offender enters or remains with the intent to commit an offense thereon, other than the offense of trespass,
commits the offense of trespass on property other than a structure or conveyance.

§ 810.09, Fla. Stat. (2000). The state did not present evidence proving that officer Savickus had probable cause to believe the defendant was committing a trespass pursuant to (1)(a)1. because there was no evidence that the defendant received an actual communication to not enter or remain on the property. Savickus admitted he had never given the defendant a trespass warning before. The residence was also not posted, fenced, or cultivated land as defined by section 810.011.1See, e.g., Smith v. State, 778 So.2d 329, 330 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (holding that convenience store was not "posted land" as defined by statute because "no trespassing" sign was attached to building rather than being posted along the lot's boundaries); In the Interest of B.P., 610 So.2d 625, 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)(holding that state did not prove that land was "posted land" as it presented no proof that owner's name appeared on "no trespassing" sign).

The state also did not satisfy (1)(a)2. Viewing the evidence of this case in a light most favorable to sustaining the trial court's ruling, see Wilson v. State, 734 So.2d 1107, 1109 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 749 So.2d 504 (Fla.1999), a reasonable officer could not have...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • McKiver v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr., 18-14857
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • March 25, 2021
    ... ... SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Attorney General, State of Florida, Respondents-Appellees. No. 18-14857 United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit ... ...
  • Alvarez v. City of Hialeah
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 4, 2005
    ...the owner had given the men permission to stop by the townhouse, sufficient to support a trespass, see generally Baker v. State, 813 So.2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). ...
  • F.E.H., Jr. v. State, 4D09-740.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 24, 2010
    ...the lot was "posted" within the meaning of subsections 810.09(1)(a) and 810.011(5)(a), Florida Statutes (2008). See Baker v. State, 813 So.2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Smith v. State, 778 So.2d 329, 330 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Appellant had already left the premises when he was stopped. See L.J......
  • D.T. v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 23, 2012
    ...the signs complied with section 810.011(5) and that the property was “posted” within the meaning of the statute. See Baker v. State, 813 So.2d 1044 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (holding police lacked probable cause to arrest for trespass where property owner placed “no trespassing” sign in lawn of t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT