State v. Avendano, 88-02111
| Decision Date | 31 March 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-02111,88-02111 |
| Citation | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 818,540 So.2d 920 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 818 STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Julio AVENDANO, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joseph R. Bryant, Asst. Atty. General, Tampa, for appellant.
William R. Webb of Carlson, Meissner, Webb & Crider, New Port Richey, for appellee.
Appellee Julio Avendano was charged with trafficking in cocaine in excess of 400 grams on September 18, 1987. Asserting that a Pasco County deputy sheriff failed to comply with the requirements of section 933.09, Florida Statutes (1987), Avendano moved to suppress evidence obtained from an allegedly unlawful search and seizure. After an evidentiary hearing on July 7, 1988, the trial court entered an order suppressing the cocaine and any inculpatory statements pertaining to it. We reverse.
Section 933.09 requires a police officer, in the execution of a search warrant, to announce his purpose and authority and to give the occupant enough time to voluntarily open the door before the officer may enter forcibly. Although the testimony of the officers conflicted, it is clear that they failed to allow enough time after their announcement to permit anyone inside to open the door voluntarily. Unless the facts of this case fall within an exception to the requirements of section 933.09, the trial court's ruling should be upheld.
It is not necessary for law enforcement officers to meet the section 933.09 requirements when "the officer's peril would have been increased had he demanded entrance and stated the purpose." Benefield v. State, 160 So.2d 706, 710 (Fla.1964). Sergeant Bach testified that on the morning of the execution of the warrant a confidential informant told him that Avendano stated that he and two others in the house would be armed. Sergeant Bach was aware that Avendano's two teenage daughters would probably be inside the residence, and he believed that a delay in the execution of the warrant would result in a shooting. Detective Gardner testified that the confidential informant had provided accurate information about Avendano in the past and informed him that Avendano had stated he would be carrying a weapon. In consideration of the violence which surrounds illegal drug trafficking, it is not reasonable to expect law enforcement officers to risk their lives and the lives of others when possessed of information as was present in this case. We...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Pruitt
...officers to risk their lives and the lives of others when possessed of information as was present in this case." State v. Avendano, 540 So.2d 920, 920-21 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).5 In the instant case, the officers knew they were not dealing with a minor league crack or marijuana dealer. The affi......
-
Wilson v. State
...So.2d 1239 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); State v. Hills, 428 So.2d 715 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 438 So.2d 833 (Fla.1983); State v. Avendano, 540 So.2d 920 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Williams v. State, 403 So.2d 430 (Fla. 3d DCA Scarcely two years ago a unanimous Supreme Court of Florida rejected "the......
-
State v. Robinson, 89-02133
...information and the other evidence did not establish a reasonable basis to fear that a gun would be used. Compare State v. Avendano, 540 So.2d 920 (Fla.2d DCA 1989) with State v. Drowne, 436 So.2d 916 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 441 So.2d 633 (Fla.1983), and Moreno v. State, 277 So.2d 81......
-
Power v. State, 77157
...had they first demanded entrance and stated their purpose. See Benefield v. State, 160 So.2d 706, 710 (Fla.1964); State v. Avendano, 540 So.2d 920, 921 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Finally, we reject Power's claim that the search warrant was invalid because it incorrectly named the owner of the hous......