Turner v. State, 88-0952
| Decision Date | 29 November 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-0952,88-0952 |
| Citation | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2743,552 So.2d 1181 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2743 Paul Gregory TURNER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Oliver Addison Parker of the Law Office of Oliver Addison Parker, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Miles Ferris and Deborah Guller, Asst. Attys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
We reverse the convictions and remand to the trial court to vacate the sentence and the order of revocation of probation.
This case arises from the stop and search of a rental vehicle on August 14, 1987. We conclude that the facts in this case do not support the state's contention that the police officer, before stopping the defendant, had a well-founded suspicion that the defendant had committed or was committing a crime.
In the course of an unrelated encounter with the same rental vehicle on August 8th, the police officer learned that the car would be due back at Hertz later that evening. She testified that she stopped the defendant on August 14th to ascertain whether the rental vehicle he was driving might be overdue. She admitted, however, that she had received no notification from Hertz to suggest that the vehicle was overdue. She did not know if the vehicle had been re-rented and she made no effort to verify her hunch before stopping the car and searching it. Under those circumstances, it is our view that her hunch that the vehicle might be stolen does not rise to the level of a well-founded suspicion of criminal activity which would justify stopping appellant.
Our ruling that the police officer did not lawfully stop appellant compels the conclusion that the property seized was the result of an unlawful search and seizure. Delp v. State, 364 So.2d 542, 543 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). Accordingly, the trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to suppress the evidence seized following the stop.
REVERSE AND REMAND.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Slydell v. State
...to whether a person is engaged in any criminal activity, such a detention is supported by no more than a hunch. See Turner v. State, 552 So.2d 1181, 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). A mere "hunch" that criminal activity may be occurring is not sufficient. See McCloud, 491 So.2d at In this case, th......
-
State v. Ramos, 90-2844
...See Aguila v. State, 567 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Williams v. State, 564 So.2d 593 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Turner v. State, 552 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Sharpless v. State, 549 So.2d 735 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). However, in this case, when the officer spoke to the woman, he was not cond......
-
Spikes v. State, No. 1D99-4164
...1st DCA 1989). A mere suspicion or subjective hunch does not provide a proper basis for an investigatory stop. See Turner v. State, 552 So.2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). In the instant case, the threshold facts required for an investigatory stop do not exist. The deputy, the sole witness for ......
-
Grayson v. State
...suspicion of Appellant's involvement in criminal activity or whether the seizure was simply a well-played hunch. Turner v. State , 552 So.2d 1181, 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). "In determining whether an officer had a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, courts consider the totality of th......