State v. Lemon, s. 68-34
| Decision Date | 03 July 1968 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 68-34,68-35,s. 68-34 |
| Citation | 212 So.2d 322 |
| Parties | STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Moses LEMON, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert R. Crittenden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellant.
Larry Byrd of Law Office of Jerome Pratt, Palmetto, for appellee.
This is an appeal by the State from an order granting appellee's 'Motion to Quash Affidavit and Search Warrant.' The State filed several informations in the Manatee County Circuit Court charging the appellee with lottery law violations. The search warrant subject to the order to quash described the house to be searched as follows:
The trial judge granted the motion to quash on the ground that the warrant authorizing the search was not sufficiently clear in its description of the subject premises. The appellee, Moses Lemon, resided in the house that was in fact searched. The house was listed as 507 8th Avenue Drive West, and this listing was specifically set out in the warrant. The difficulty arose because of the surplus language in the warrant stating that, 'Said dwelling is the last house on the right' before the dead-end at the railroad tracks, when in reality the Lemon residence was the next-to-the-last house before the tracks. Although the case is a close one, we believe the trial judge erred, and we reverse.
The law has long been settled that a designation or description in a warrant is sufficient when it leads an officer unerringly to the subject premises. Bonner v. State, Fla.1955, 80 So.2d 683; Jackson v. State, 1924, 87 Fla. 262, 99 So. 548; Seymore v. State, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 460; 47 Am.Jur., Searches & Seizure § 35. It is a sufficient designation if the officer to whom the warrant is directed is enabled to locate the place...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Sero
...The description, however, must be such that the officer is enabled to locate the place to be searched with certainty. State v. Lemon, 212 So.2d 322 (Fla.Ct.App.1968). The description '* * * should identify the premises in such manner as to leave the officer no doubt and no discretion as to ......
-
Nofs v. State
...to the floor upon which the apartment was located, and therefore, such reference was surplusage and can be disregarded. State v. Lemon, Fla.App.2d 1968, 212 So.2d 322; State v. Gallo, Fla.App.2d 1973, 279 So.2d 71; United States v. Contee, D.C.D.C.1959, 170 F.Supp. The evidence showed that ......
-
Finney v. State, 68--456
...ruling on the motion to suppress. Bonner v. State, Fla.1955, 80 So.2d 683; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 461; State v. Lemmon, Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 322. There was no need for the trial judge to give the circumstantial evidence charge when the record contained direct, positive i......
-
State v. Oldack
...the premises to be searched in language that would lead the searchers unerringly to the premises to be searched. State v. Lemon, Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 322, 323. I would reverse on the authority of State v. Lewis, Fla.App.1969, 225 So.2d ON PETITION FOR REHEARING PER CURIAM. The petition f......