Bostick v. State, 70996
| Decision Date | 02 January 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 70996,70996 |
| Citation | 593 So.2d 494 |
| Parties | 17 Fla. L. Weekly S15 Terrance BOSTICK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Kenneth P. Speiller of the Law Offices of Max P. Engle, Miami, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.
Edward A. Hanna, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, amicus curiae, for Nick Navarro, Sheriff.
Joseph S. Paglino of the Law Office of Joseph S. Paglino, Miami, amicus curiae.
We have Florida v. Bostick, --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991), rev'g 554 So.2d 1153 (Fla.1989), for consideration on remand from the United States Supreme Court.
The facts are set forth fully in our previous opinion. Bostick v. State, 554 So.2d 1153, 1154-55 (Fla.1989). Briefly stated, two officers boarded the Greyhound bus on which Bostick was a passenger, obtained consent to search his luggage, and seized cocaine found in one of his bags. Bostick moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that his consent was not voluntary. The trial court denied the motion, and Bostick was convicted of trafficking in cocaine. The district court affirmed.
In light of the Supreme Court's opinion, we now approve the decision of the district court.
It is so ordered.
I must respectfully dissent from the majority's position in this case. While the trial court denied the motion to suppress, it made no express findings of fact. Although I acknowledge that the United States Supreme Court has ruled all bus searches without any articulable suspicion of criminal conduct are not per se unreasonable, I would find that Bostick's consent to search was invalid as a product of an unreasonable seizure under the specific facts of this case.
A review of the record reveals that Bostick was reclining on the back seat of the Greyhound bus when two officers wearing green jackets bearing the insignia of the Broward County Sheriff's Department boarded the bus during a rest stop in Fort Lauderdale. The officers proceeded immediately to the rear of the bus, and one officer was carrying a recognizable pouch containing a gun. Despite the lack of any articulable suspicion, the officers stood in the aisle in front of Bostick and questioned him as to his destination, and requested that he produce his ticket and identification. The ticket matched Bostick's identification and both were returned to him, but the officers nonetheless persisted in their questioning. Stating that they were narcotics agents in search of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Collins v. State
...intent to commit larceny or a felony therein.3 Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 111 S.Ct. 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991), on remand, 593 So.2d 494 (Fla.1992); Florida v. Rodriguez, 469 U.S. 1, 105 S.Ct. 308, 83 L.Ed.2d 165 (1984), on remand, 462 So.2d 69 (Fla.App. 3 Dist.1985); Florida v. Ro......
-
U.S. v. Little
...Florida Supreme Court simply reversed its prior position suppressing the evidence in a brief unreasoned per curiam opinion. Bostick v. State, 593 So.2d 494 (Fla.1992). Lower courts have essentially compared their cases with the circumstances in Bostick, or referenced therein, weighing towar......
-
U.S. v. Perez, 00 CR 257(SAS).
...957 F.2d at 1008. 11. On remand, the Florida Supreme Court found the encounter in Bostick to be consensual. See Bostick v. State, 593 So.2d 494, 495 (Fla.1992) (per curiam). 12. Perez does not contest the content of the form or claim that a reasonable person in his situation would fail to u......
-
State v. Kindle, 5D00-2020.
...could have asked this question even if the stop had ended and the two had merely been engaged in a citizen encounter. See Bostick v. State, 593 So.2d 494 (Fla.1992). Id. at 1092 n. 2; see also State v. Vera, 666 So.2d 576 (Fla. 2d DCA In the instant appeal, the trial court found that the tr......
-
Whitewashing the Fourth Amendment
...Supreme Court’s decision, summarily affirmed the trial court’s ruling denying Mr. Bostick’s suppression motion. See Bostick v. State, 593 So. 2d 494, 495 (Fla. 1992) (per curiam). 94. See, e.g. , Jamelia Morgan, Essay, Disability’s Fourth Amendment , 122 COLUM. L. REV. 489, 515–16 (2022) (......
-
Reconstructing consent.
...a reasonable person would have felt free to decline the officer's requests or otherwise terminate the encounter. Bostick v. State, 593 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 1992) (on remand, Florida Supreme Court found encounter Many scholars have criticized these decisions on a number of grounds, including the......
-
§ 7.03 SEIZURE OF PERSONS
...B was not seized. On remand, the state supreme court affirmed the finding of the trial court that no seizure occurred. Bostick v. State, 593 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 1992).[40] The Court subsequently applied this "terminate the encounter" test outside the bus sweep context, indicating that it is th......
-
§ 7.03 Seizure of Persons
...B was not seized. On remand, the state supreme court affirmed the finding of the trial court that no seizure occurred. Bostick v. State, 593 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 1992).[40] The Court subsequently applied this "terminate the encounter" test outside the bus sweep context, indicating that it is th......