Mosley v. State, 87-1080
Decision Date | 27 January 1988 |
Docket Number | No. 87-1080,87-1080 |
Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 302 John D. MOSLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, Bartow, and Brad Permar, Assistant Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Candance M. Sunderland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Appellant, John D. Mosley, pled nolo contendre to possession of cocaine, reserving his right to appeal. He was sentenced to two years in prison. On appeal, he argues that the court should have granted his motion to suppress evidence of a piece of rock cocaine that the police seized when they arrested appellant.
Appellant maintains that he was improperly stopped and that the evidence resulting from that improper stop was thus tainted. We agree.
Appellant's actions here did nothing to raise a founded suspicion in the officers' minds. We have these four facts: (1) Appellant was in a high crime area; (2) appellant's companion was allegedly a drug dealer; (3) appellant was walking, but not "away;" and (4) appellant's fists were clenched in a nonthreatening manner.
Mere presence in a high crime area will not raise founded suspicion of criminal activity justifying a temporary detention. G.J.P. v. State, 469 So.2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Even running away from police in a high crime area is not enough to justify an investigative stop. Cobb v. State, 511 So.2d 698 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). The officers here admitted that appellant's fists were clenched in a nonthreatening manner. Nothing was passed between appellant and his female companion. Merely talking to a drug dealer does not raise a founded suspicion of criminal activity. See McClure v. State, 358 So.2d 1187 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). These facts simply do not create a founded suspicion of criminal activity. The detention was improper. Since the detention was improper, the seizure of cocaine was also improper.
We reverse and remand with instructions to discharge appellant for this offense. See McClure.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Poole v. State, 92-2617
...2d DCA 1989); State v. Hoover, 520 So.2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Morris v. State, 519 So.2d 706 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Mosley v. State, 519 So.2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); G.J.P. v. State, 469 So.2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).4 See Curry v. State, 570 So.2d 1071 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Kindell v. State......
-
Jones v. State
...The stop was not justified, however, because of the absence of the necessary founded suspicion of criminal activity. Mosley v. State, 519 So.2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Where the detention is illegal, any evidence seized in a subsequent pat down is invalid and should be suppressed. Wong Sun v......
-
Johnson v. State, 91-2922
...See Smith v. State, 592 So.2d 1206, 1207-08 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Shackelford v. State, 579 So.2d 306 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Mosley v. State, 519 So.2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (reversing denial of suppression order where appellant clenched fists in non-threatening manner and was accompanying purpo......
-
KGM v. State
...a piling on of inferences derived from otherwise legal conduct. See Peabody v. State, 556 So.2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Mosley v. State, 519 So.2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); King v. State, 521 So.2d 334 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); State v. Hoover, 520 So.2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); State v. Isaacs, 57......