Carter v. State, 77-2242
| Citation | 370 So.2d 1181 |
| Decision Date | 28 March 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 77-2242,77-2242 |
| Parties | James CARTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Tatjana Ostapoff, Asst. Public Defender, and Ilene Allison Brooks, Legal Intern, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles A. Stampelos, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Defendant Carter was adjudicated guilty after he entered a plea of nolo contendere to charges of battery and carrying a concealed firearm. He preserved his right to appeal the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence he contends was seized as a result of an illegal search of his person.
On June 12, 1977, at approximately five o'clock in the morning, a Palm Beach County Sheriff's Deputy Batista was enroute to answer a call when he passed a lone man (Defendant Carter) walking east along State Road 80 about 12 miles east of Belle Glade. On returning to Belle Glade after responding to that call the deputy again noticed the same man still walking east along the highway in this area of the county where there are farms and ranches, very few houses, and no street lights. Thinking it unusual for someone to be walking along that lonely stretch of road 30 miles from West Palm Beach at that time of morning, and that the man might be stranded with his car up the road and in need of help, the deputy stopped, got out, greeted Defendant, asked him to stand in front of the patrol car, and inquired of him what he was doing and where he was going (his answer to which was Belle Glade, opposite the direction he was headed). With Defendant illuminated by the headlights and spotlight of the patrol car, the deputy glanced down at Defendant's waistline, and noticed a bulge in his right front pocket causing it to be weighted down. At the same time, while standing next to Defendant, the deputy tapped the bulge with the back of his hand and felt it was metal or something hard; turning to "look sort of" in the pocket, he could see "the grips" of a gun. Asked then what was in his pocket, Defendant said, Thereupon the deputy removed the gun from Defendant's pocket and arrested him.
The Defendant has urged on appeal that we adopt the law applied in Vollmer v. State, 337 So.2d 1024 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) which our Supreme Court has reviewed and approved on conflict certiorari in Mullins v. State, 366 So.2d 1162 (Fla., 1978). Vollmer (a pedestrian walking a city street at 3:00 A.M.) and Mullins (a bicyclist riding slowly through a residential area in the very early morning hours) were stopped, arrested and searched on nothing more than the arresting officer's bare suspicion each was involved in illegal activity. Since the initial stop and arrest in each case was unlawful in each instance, the search which followed was necessarily invalid since a warrantless search is permissible only as an incident to a lawful arrest.
While noting some similarities of fact, Vollmer and Mullins are distinguishable from the case sub judice. Here, if we are to believe the arresting officer, he did not stop the Defendant for the purpose of arresting him, but for the purpose of offering him any assistance he might need or wish. And, the search of the Defendant, preceding rather than following his arrest, was limited in its scope to a single tap of and glance into the pocket for the purpose of determining if the Defendant was armed.
Justice Alderman, in his concurring opinion in the Mullins case, supra, recognizes that there are instances which may arise where legitimate contact between a police officer and a citizen may result in the citizen's arrest for a crime detected by the officer as a result of such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sommer v. State
...weapon, a frisk of that citizen's person is entirely justified to insure the safety of the police officer. Id. at 270. In Carter v. State, 370 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 378 So.2d 343 (Fla.1979), the court, citing Mullins v. State, 366 So.2d 1162 (Fla.1978), cert. denied, 444 ......
-
Lightbourne v. State
...weapon, a frisk of that citizen's person is entirely justified to insure the safety of the police officer. Id. at 270. In Carter v. State, 370 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 378 So.2d 343 (Fla.1979), the court, citing Mullins v. State, 366 So.2d 1162 (Fla.1978), cert. denied, 444 ......
-
Woodson v. State
...DCA 1985); Madrict v. State, 409 So.2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Login v. State, 394 So.2d 183, 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Carter v. State, 370 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 378 So.2d 343 In J.C.W., the officer stopped the appellant who at that point in time had walked approximately......
-
Com. v. Rehmeyer
...his life by placing [appellee] in the patrol car with him without the precaution of a pat- down for weapons." Carter v. State, 370 So.2d 1181, 1183 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1979). This important governmental interest must be weighed against the intrusion into Rehmeyer's right to be free from unreas......