Cox v. State, 90-02558

Citation586 So.2d 1321
Decision Date04 October 1991
Docket NumberNo. 90-02558,90-02558
PartiesWillie COX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 586 So.2d 1321, 16 Fla. L. Week. D2583
CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)

James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow, and Vince E. Turner, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Katherine B. Johnson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for appellee.

THREADGILL, Judge.

Willie Cox pleaded no contest to possession of cocaine and possession of marijuana reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. We reverse.

At the suppression hearing, it was established that on March 8, 1990, at 3:00 a.m. in the vicinity of the Tampa Airport, a Tampa police officer stopped a 1989 or 1990 white four-door Oldsmobile Cutlass displaying a rental tag and being driven by the appellant. Such a car had been included in a monthly list of stolen vehicles the officer had received at roll-call. The officer did not have the list with him, but remembered a "white Oldsmobile" was among the fifteen vehicles reported stolen. The officer did not know the year of the stolen car, the date it was stolen, the agency it was stolen from or its tag number. The officer did not check the appellant's tag number through the police computer prior to the stop to determine if the car was stolen, because the computers were slow. A later computer check revealed that the car had not been stolen.

When the appellant stepped out to talk to the officer, he dropped a baggie of marijuana to the ground. The officer then arrested him for possession of marijuana, searched him, and found a rock of cocaine in his waistband. The appellant argues that the evidence should have been suppressed because the initial stop was illegal. We agree.

The description upon which the officer relied in this case was too general to constitute a founded or reasonable suspicion for a stop. Lewis v. State, 337 So.2d 1031 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). In Lewis we held that a description of two white males in a red Volkswagon selling drugs on the north side of Lakeland and heading south was too vague to justify a stop. The description in this case likewise lacks distinguishing details upon which reasonable suspicion for a stop could be based.

It is clear that the appellant's act of abandoning or accidently dropping the marijuana was prompted by or the result of the officer's illegal stop. There was a direct connection between the unlawful...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • State v. Marrero, 2D03-4902.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 21, 2005
    ...So.2d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), or a description of a stolen vehicle too general to support a well-founded suspicion as in Cox v. State, 586 So.2d 1321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). The trial court erred in finding that Deputy Valles did not have a reasonable suspicion necessary to authorize an investi......
  • Hollinger v. State
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • June 24, 1993
    ...GRIMES, Justice. We review State v. Hollinger, 596 So.2d 521 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), because of certified conflict with Cox v. State, 586 So.2d 1321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), Wallace v. State, 540 So.2d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), and Spann v. State, 529 So.2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). We have jurisdict......
  • State v. Hollinger
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 3, 1992
    ...Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's order granting appellee's motion to suppress the cocaine. To the extent that Cox v. State, 586 So.2d 1321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Wallace v. State, 540 So.2d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); and Spann v. State, 529 So.2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) are contrary, we......
  • May v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 30, 2007
    ...detention, the trial court should suppress the evidence. Welch v. State, 689 So.2d 1240, 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Cox v. State, 586 So.2d 1321, 1322 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Here, however, the deputies lawfully detained Mr. May. See State v. Holland, 680 So.2d 1041, 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), aff......
  • 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