State v. Chapman, 78-2290

• Decision Date: 09 October 1979
• Docket Number: No. 78-2290,78-2290
• Citation: 376 So.2d 262
• Parties: The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Gary Thomas CHAPMAN, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 262

376 So.2d 262

The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Gary Thomas CHAPMAN, Appellee.

No. 78-2290.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 9, 1979.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 26, 1979.

Janet Reno, State's Atty. and Ira N. Loewy, Asst. State's Atty., for appellant.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Karen M. Gottlieb, Asst. Public Defender, for appellee.

Before HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ., and CHAPPELL, BILL G., Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal by the State of Florida stems from an order of the trial court granting defendant's motion to suppress tangible evidence. At issue is the authority of an off-duty police officer, outside of his jurisdiction, to detain the defendant and subsequently deliver him to the custody of law enforcement officers of that jurisdiction.

At approximately 2:30 A.M. on December 16, 1977, Coral Gables police officer, Michael Infante, was returning to his home, and he observed the defendant and another individual standing between some parked cars in a yard located three houses away from Officer Infante's home. Officer Infante was off duty, was not in uniform and was not driving a marked police vehicle. His home was not located within the municipal limits of Coral Gables.

Though he did not observe the defendant or the other individual touch any of the vehicles, Officer Infante went inside his home and telephoned the Dade County Public Safety Department because he did not recognize either of them as a resident of the area. He then returned outside and continued to observe the two men. Officer Infante saw one of the men leave the area and subsequently observed the defendant walking toward him carrying what appeared to be a tape deck or a radio in one hand.

Officer Infante was standing behind a big tree, and when the defendant was within a few feet of him, he stepped out and confronted him. Infante identified himself as a Coral Gables police officer, displayed his badge and directed defendant to place the item he was carrying on the ground. At this point Infante noticed that defendant had a sock over one arm while he had been carrying a tape deck in the other hand. Infante then patted down the defendant, asked for identification and detained him. Upon arrival, the public safety officer took custody of the defendant and received his identification from Infante. After locking defendant in a police unit, all of the officers examined the parked vehicles and discovered a screwdriver in the door of a red Toyota from which the tape player was missing.

The trial court's order granting defendant's motion to suppress the tape deck stated:

"5. At no time did Officer Infante actually see the defendant touch the vehicle or try to break into the vehicle though he had seen defendant bending down in the vicinity of the vehicles.

The court concerns itself with the validity of the initial detention of the defendant. The court finds that Officer Infante had no probable cause to arrest or detain the defendant. . . ."

A trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress comes to this court with a presumption of correctness, and in testing the accuracy of the trial court's conclusions, we should interpret the evidence and all reasonable inferences and deductions capable therefrom in a light most favorable to sustain these conclusions. Brenner v....