State v. Marsh
| Decision Date | 13 March 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-01186,90-01186 |
| Citation | 576 So.2d 387,16 Fla. L. Weekly 726 |
| Parties | 16 Fla. L. Weekly 726 STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Rebecca MARSH, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Stephen A. Baker, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.
Frank Louderback of Louderback, McCoun & Helinger, St. Petersburg, for appellee.
The appellant, State of Florida, appeals a trial court order granting a motion to suppress evidence seized in connection with the arrest of the appellee, Rebecca Marsh. We reverse.
The state filed an information charging the appellee with possession of cocaine, possession of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The appellee filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from her vehicle on the grounds that the information relied upon by the officers to initiate the stop was uncorroborated information from a source of unknown reliability and, therefore, insufficient to justify a stop pursuant to section 901.151, Florida Statutes (1987). The motion further alleged that any consent given subsequent to the illegal stop was invalid.
Officers Lloyd Wentz and Michael Metcalf testified at the suppression hearing. The officers testified that they were conducting a bar check at the Biarritz nightclub when they were approached by a white female whom they had never met or seen before, but whom they believed was a club employee. She informed the officers that two women had been snorting cocaine through a gold tipped straw in the ladies bathroom. She described the two women and pointed them out. She then walked the officers outside and showed them the sports car, a Subaru, in which the two women had been in earlier. After receiving this information and without verifying it, the officers waited in their squad car for the two women to leave. Shortly thereafter, the two women exited the nightclub, entered the Subaru, and drove away. The officers immediately stopped the vehicle.
Officer Wentz asked the appellee for her driver's license and to exit the vehicle. The appellee cooperated. Officer Wentz then asked the appellee for consent to search her vehicle and informed her that he and Officer Metcalf had been told that she had been using cocaine. The appellee responded by telling the officers to "[g]o ahead and search all you want."
Officer Wentz found a pink ceramic pipe with marijuana residue in the center console of the car. Officer Metcalf found a brass pipe and a glass tube with a gold colored tip with cocaine residue inside a white purse located behind the driver's seat. The officers then seized the evidence and arrested the appellee. The trial court granted the appellee's motion to suppress the evidence, and the state filed a timely notice of appeal.
We recognize that a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress comes to this court with a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pinkney v. State, 94-3455
...challenge for law enforcement, as they require detailed and specific information corroborated by police investigation. State v. Marsh, 576 So.2d 387 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Key v. State, 553 So.2d 301 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). That corroboration often requires personal observations of suspicious act......
-
J.C. v. State, 90-2793
...driving this automobile in the immediate vicinity a few minutes after the tipster had given police this information. See State v. Marsh, 576 So.2d 387 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Bussey v. State, 528 So.2d 955 (Fla. 3d DCA Having concluded that the motion to suppress was properly denied, we must no......
-
Rega v. State, 99-149.
...3d DCA 1995); Mitchell v. State, 598 So.2d 274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Guardado v. State, 562 So.2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So.2d 387 (Fla.1991). ...
-
Reed v. State
...information later corroborated by prompt police action in locating the described individual in the named location." State v. Marsh, 576 So.2d 387 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). The information relayed to the police officers in this case clearly did not meet this test as it contained no facts to distin......