Fox v. State, 90-2455
| Decision Date | 28 May 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-2455,90-2455 |
| Parties | Robert FOX, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. 580 So.2d 313, 16 Fla. L. Week. D1446 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Elliot H. Scherker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Angelica D. Zayas, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ.
Robert Fox appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine and trespass after warning. We affirm.
Officer Edwin Gonzalez is a member of a crime suppression team which patrols the public housing project involved in this case, the Modello Housing Project, as well as other sites, in order to control crime and narcotics problems in those locations. The Modello Housing Project is posted with "no trespassing" signs on all of the buildings. On January 4 officer Gonzalez observed defendant on the premises, ascertained that he had no reason to be there, and advised him either to leave the project or be arrested for trespassing. Defendant departed.
The next afternoon at 4 p.m., the same officer again observed defendant on the grounds of the Modello Project. He again ascertained that defendant had no reason to be there and again warned him to leave. At 9 p.m. the same day, the officer again observed defendant at the Modello Project. At that time he arrested defendant for trespass after warning. In a search incident to the arrest, the officer found cocaine on defendant's person. Defendant was tried and convicted for possession of cocaine and trespass after warning.
Defendant's principal contention on this appeal is that the officer did not have the authority to warn him to leave the premises, and therefore could not arrest him for trespass after warning. We disagree.
The trespass statute creates a misdemeanor penalty "[i]f the offender defies an order to leave, personally communicated to him by the owner of the premises or by an authorized person...." Sec. 810.09(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1989) (emphasis added). In the present case the Modello Project is a publicly owned housing project managed by a Dade County employee.
"On public premises, authorized personnel includes those persons who have been given either express or implied authority from the chief executive." State v. Dye, 346 So.2d 538, 542 (Fla.1977). Under Dye, public employees who have been designated "to exercise control over [public] property constitute the class of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Blair
...that the complex is not open to the general public absent an invitation from a resident to visit the premises. See also Fox v. State, 580 So.2d 313 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1991) (manager of public housing project had authority to enlist assistance of police in warning trespassers to leave the prem......
-
Daniel v. City of Tampa, Fla.
...agrees that Plaintiff may not have conceded that delegation is valid; however, Florida case law suggests otherwise. In Fox v. State, 580 So.2d 313 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1991), the Third District Court of Appeal held that the manager of a public housing project could authorize a municipal police off......
-
Jones v. State
...or constructive notice to the defendant against entering or remaining on the grounds of the public housing complex. Compare Fox v. State, 580 So.2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA) (defendant's conviction for trespass on public housing project sustained where police officer twice warned the defendant to l......
-
Fox v. State
...181 591 So.2d 181 Fox (Robert) v. State NO. 78,327 591 So.2d 181 Supreme Court of Florida. Oct 25, 1991 Appeal From: 3d DCA 580 So.2d 313 Rev. ...