Whitley v. State
| Decision Date | 16 September 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-444,76-444 |
| Citation | 349 So.2d 840 |
| Parties | Lonnie WHITLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, and W. C. McLain, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Davis G. Anderson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
An information charging appellant with possession of marijuana, heroin, and paraphernalia and carrying a concealed weapon was filed in the circuit court on January 16, 1976. Appellant filed a motion to suppress certain evidence on March 4, 1976. After a hearing the motion was denied, and appellant then entered a plea of nolo contendere to all four counts of the information. He was adjudicated guilty by the trial court and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. He reserved the right to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress.
Appellant contends on appeal that since the circumstances did not meet the standards of Section 901.151, Florida Statutes, the detention was invalid and thereby the evidence seized was inadmissible at trial.
The first time Police Sergeant Troy Hitchcox saw appellant was when appellant entered a vehicle which Hitchcox had under surveillance. The vehicle had been used in a drug transaction two weeks earlier. As the automobile was driven away Hitchcox and his partner, Detective Bonnie Lewis, followed. Hitchcox radioed for a uniformed officer to stop the vehicle.
After the automobile was stopped Hitchcox observed what appeared to be a marijuana cigarette in the ashtray. Detective Lewis then arrested appellant and the driver of the car for possession of marijuana. An inventory search revealed a gun concealed under the seat, heroin, and a heroin blending kit. These items became the basis of the charges against appellant.
Hitchcox and Lewis testified that the only basis for the stop was to continue a narcotics investigation. They did not see a traffic violation being committed. They were not making a license check. They did not have a warrant or consent to stop and search the vehicle. Neither police officer testified that appellant was connected with the previous drug transaction which had involved the same automobile.
A valid detention under Section 901.151, Florida Statutes, requires that the officer be aware of circumstances which reasonably indicate that the person detained for investigation has committed, is committing, or is about...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rizo
...4th DCA 1982); Robinson v. State, 388 So.2d 286 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Parker v. State, 363 So.2d 383 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Whitley v. State, 349 So.2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). See State v. Webb, 398 So.2d 820 (Fla.1981). Cf. Finney (information given to police by victim directly following crime......
-
Carter v. State
...L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Caladonato v. State, 348 So.2d 326 (Fla.1977); Lewis v. State, 382 So.2d 1249 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Whitley v. State, 349 So.2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Accordingly, we reverse Carter's conviction and remand with directions for his We have reviewed appellant's remaining co......
-
State v. Augustyn
...indicate that the individual is engaged in criminal activity or else the stop is illegal. § 901.151, Fla.Stat. (1977); Whitley v. State, 349 So.2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). While acknowledging the holding of State v. Hetland, 366 So.2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), which disallows detentions based ......
-
State v. Beja, s. 83-1095
...Mullins v. State, 366 So.2d 1162 (Fla.1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 883, 100 S.Ct. 173, 62 L.Ed.2d 113 (1979); Whitley v. State, 349 So.2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977), the Second District Court of Appeal found in Kayes v. State, 409 So.2d 1075 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), petition for review denied, 424 ......