DG v. State, 3D02-818.
| Decision Date | 27 November 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 3D02-818.,3D02-818. |
| Parties | D.G., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Manuel Alvarez, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Richard E. Doran, Attorney General, and Michael J. Neimand, and John Barker, Assistant Attorneys General (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee.
Before GERSTEN, GREEN, and SHEVIN, JJ.
Appellant D.G., a juvenile ("D.G."), appeals his adjudication of delinquency claiming the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress tangible evidence. We reverse finding D.G. was searched pursuant to an illegal arrest, and thus the drugs found on his person should have been suppressed.
D.G. was charged by petition with possession of cocaine and resisting arrest without violence, after an officer observed him chasing another person down a street late one night. When confronted by the police officer, D.G. told the officer that he was chasing the third person because that person owed D.G. money. The officer did not believe a crime was being committed and did not intend to arrest D.G.
However, when D.G. turned his back on the officer and tried to walk away from her, the officer grabbed D.G.'s shirt and decided to detain him in order to complete her investigation. The officer radioed for back-up and shortly thereafter another officer arrived on the scene.
When the second officer arrived, he observed the first officer trying to handcuff D.G. The two officers then forced D.G.'s hands behind his back and handcuffed him. The second officer discovered a plastic bottle in D.G.'s front pocket which contained a cocaine rock. The second officer testified that he believed D.G. was under arrest and was going to charge D.G. with resisting arrest.
The trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress the cocaine and found that the first officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant for resisting arrest without violence. We disagree.
Absent reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime, a person has an affirmative right to avoid police contact. See Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 120 S.Ct. 673, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000)
; Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983). Without a founded suspicion of criminal activity, a police officer does not have the right to detain a person absent that person's consent. See Slydell v. State, 792 So.2d 667 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001).
Here,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Juvenile v. The State Of Fla.
...arrest, logically, [the juvenile] cannot be charged with having resisted an arrest.” D.T.B., 892 So.2d at 525; see also D.G. v. State, 831 So.2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). All that the officer testified to was that he was dispatched in response to a burglary in the neighborhood. The trial cour......
-
Hussey v. State
...See S.P. v. State, 833 So.2d 267, 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Lee v. State, 868 So.2d 577, 582-83 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); D.G. v. State, 831 So.2d 256, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Chamson v. State, 529 So.2d 1160 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), review denied, 539 So.2d 476 (Fla.1988); see also Illinois v. Wardlow......
-
DTB v. State, 3D04-844.
...of acquittal challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence to establish each element of the crime charged). In D.G. v. State, 831 So.2d 256, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), this Court, citing Wardlow, articulated the rule that "[a]bsent reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime, a person......
-
Binder v. RAINBOW MEDICAL INC., 3D02-111.
... ... The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to establish that a class should be certified. See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Kendrick, 822 So.2d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc. v. Updegraff, 807 So.2d 768 ... ...