Jester v. State, 75--1718
| Decision Date | 26 October 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--1718,75--1718 |
| Citation | 339 So.2d 242 |
| Parties | Arthur JESTER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, Karen M. Gottlieb, Asst. Public Defender and James R. Wulchak, Legal Intern, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Arthur Joel Berger, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HENDRY, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.
Arthur Jester, defendant in the trial court, pled nolo contendere to an affidavit of violation of probation, and to a charge of possession of narcotics implements, reserving the right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress. He was sentenced to six months in the Dade County Stockade on the violation of probation, and placed on probation for two years for the crime of possession of narcotics implements. The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress.
Generally, a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress comes to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness and, in testing the accuracy of the trial court's conclusions, the appellate court should interpret the evidence and all reasonable inferences and deductions capable of being drawn therefrom in a light most favorable to sustain the trial court's conclusion. Ponder v. State, 323 So.2d 296, 297 (Fla.3rd DCA 1975); Wigfall v. State, 323 So.2d 587 (Fla.3rd DCA 1975).
The record reflects that on the day in question, a City of Miami, police officer encountered a lawfully parked automobile for the reason that it was a 1973 vehicle with a temporary license tag, and the police were '. . . having stolen cars with temporary tags. . . .' The officer asked the driver for identification, which was shown, and then asked the passenger, Arthur Jester, to produce his identification. When Jester failed to produce identification, the officer asked both men out of the car. As they were getting out, the officer walked around the car and noticed a balled up newspaper partially underneath Jester's side of the car. Inspection revealed narcotics implements inside, and a red blood stain in the middle of the newspaper. The officer then placed Jester under arrest for possession of narcotics implements and asked him to roll up his sleeve, whereupon, the officer observed a 'fresh track mark' on Jester's arm.
On appeal Jester contends that the initial encounter by the officer with the car was unreasonable and unconstitutional, since the officer was not acting on probable cause: there was no indication that a crime had been committed in the vicinity; there was no reasonable indication that either...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Melendez
...475 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).4 State v. Ashby, 245 So.2d 225 (Fla.1971); State v. Hughes, 375 So.2d 615 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1979); Jester v. State, 339 So.2d 242 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1976) cert. denied, 348 So.2d 948 (Fla.1977); State v. Daniel, 319 So.2d 582 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Golphin v. State, 293 So.2d ......
-
Wilkerson v. State
...was reasonable by Fourth Amendment standards. Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 99 S.Ct. 1391, 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979); Jester v. State, 339 So.2d 242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Brown v. Texas, --- U.S. ----, 99 S.Ct. 2637, 61 L.Ed.2d 357 AFFIRMED. LARRY G. SMITH, J., concurs. ERVIN, J., dissents. E......
-
Barrios v. State
...DCA 1978); Lovely v. State, 351 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Churney v. State, 348 So.2d 395 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); Jester v. State, 339 So.2d 242 (Fla.3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 348 So.2d 948 (Fla.1977); Wigfall v. State, 323 So.2d 587 (Fla.3d DCA 1975); Rodriquez v. State, 189 So.2d 656 (......
-
Russell v. State
...DCA 1974); State v. Daniel, 319 So.2d 582 (Fla.4th DCA 1975); Ponder v. State, 323 So.2d 296 (Fla.3d DCA 1975), and Jester v. State, 339 So.2d 242 (Fla.3d DCA 1976). ...