State v. Blanco
Decision Date | 06 October 1987 |
Docket Number | No. 86-2482,86-2482 |
Citation | 513 So.2d 739,12 Fla. L. Weekly 2370 |
Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2370 The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Oscar BLANCO, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Mark J. Berkowitz and Susan Hugentugler, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellant.
Casuso & McHale and Louis Casuso, Sheldon R. Zilbert, Miami, for appellee.
Before BASKIN, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
We review an order suppressing nineteen kilograms of cocaine found in the trunk of a motor vehicle driven by the defendant and a statement made by him after the search of the trunk. 1 The trial court found that the vehicle had been improperly impounded under Miller v. State, 403 So.2d 1307 (Fla.1981), and concluded that the ensuing inventory search of the vehicle was invalid. We have no quarrel with the trial court's finding that the impoundment did not meet Miller's requirements. However, the State did not rely solely on a Miller impoundment theory to validate the search, but put forth the distinct and separate argument that the police could have seized the vehicle for forfeiture and conducted the very same search. The trial court rejected this argument, erroneously believing that "unless there is a bona fide intention to forfeit the car," an improper impoundment of the vehicle cannot be converted into a seizure under the forfeiture statute. We reverse.
In the present case, the car was stopped because the defendant ran a red light. As the police officer approached the car, he saw an open satchel on the console between the front seats and saw a transparent baggie with white powder in the satchel. The officer ordered the defendant and his front-seat passenger out of the car and placed them under arrest for possession of cocaine. The satchel contained more suspected cocaine below the visible baggie. The total of the cocaine in the satchel later weighed in at 22 grams.
No challenge was ever made to the validity of the stop or the defendant's arrest. The defendant's attack on the search of the trunk was simply that because the car was properly parked off the road and not obstructing traffic, it could not, contrary to the officer's stated belief, be impounded. The trial court agreed and suppressed the search of the trunk on the ground that it was made pursuant to the officer's unjustified impoundment-inventory theory, notwithstanding that the officer undeniably would have been justified in searching the trunk had he seized the vehicle for forfeiture. See §§ 932.701-. 704, Fla.Stat. (1985); Cooper v. California, 386 U.S. 58, 87 S.Ct. 788, 17 L.Ed.2d 730 (1967). This ruling was clearly wrong.
The rule which controls this case is that the lawfulness of a warrantless search is to be determined by an objective view of the facts, not the subjective view of the person conducting the search. Padron v. State, 449 So.2d 811 (Fla.1984). The court in Padron approved the reasoning of this court that "the validity of the search as incident to the arrest is unaffected by the fact that the police officers classified their actions as an inventory search." Id. at 812 (quoting State v. Padron, 425 So.2d 644, 645 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)). The court said, Padron v. State, 449 So.2d at 812. Thus, an automobile search, although mistakenly characterized by the police as an inventory...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Jones v. State
...Scott v. United States, 436 U.S. 128, 98 S.Ct. 1717, 56 L.Ed.2d 168 (1978); Padron v. State, 449 So.2d 811 (Fla.1984); State v. Blanco, 513 So.2d 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). W. SHARP and GOSHORN, JJ., concur. ...
-
State v. DeAngelis, 90-1370
...is to be determined by an objective view of the facts, not the subjective view of the person conducting the search." State v. Bianco, 513 So.2d 739, 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). The fact that the officers might have subjectively believed they were searching the BMW based on a particular exceptio......
-
State v. Carmody
...one, does not affect the validity of the arrest. Thomas v. State, 395 So.2d 280 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). See also, State v. Blanco, 513 So.2d 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Gasset v. State, 490 So.2d 97, 98 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 500 So.2d 544 (Fla.1986); State v. Irvin, 483 So.2d 461, 462 (Fla. 5......
-
State v. Scott, 90-473
...is to be determined by an objective view of the facts, not the subjective view of the person conducting the search." State v. Blanco, 513 So.2d 739, 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Accordingly, we reverse the order of suppression and remand for further proceedings consistent Reversed and remanded. ...