Zelinski v. State, 96-04138
| Decision Date | 18 June 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 96-04138,96-04138 |
| Citation | 695 So.2d 834 |
| Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1508 Richard Burns ZELINSKI, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Joseph A. Eustace, Jr. of Anthony J. LaSpada, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Tonja R. Vickers, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
Richard Burns Zelinski appeals the trial court's order denying his dispositive motion to suppress evidence. We reverse.
The state charged Zelinski with possession of marijuana and resisting arrest without violence. At the motion to suppress hearing, Officer Cravens testified that he was dispatched to a convenience store/gas station-type business in Plant City because of a reported suspicious person. Upon arrival, Officer Cravens, in uniform, met with the owner of the business, Mr. Siddiqui, who stated that the suspicious person had left. However, Mr. Siddiqui expressed concern over a vehicle that was parked toward the back of the property with its lights off. The vehicle was occupied by several people.
Upon entering the store, Officer Cravens passed Zelinski who was leaving the store. Mr. Siddiqui told Officer Cravens that Zelinski was one of the occupants of the vehicle and that he was trying to buy beer. Officer Cravens believed that Zelinski looked "a little young" to be purchasing beer.
As he left the store, Officer Cravens noticed that Zelinski was a passenger in the front seat of a vehicle which was departing from the store. The vehicle eventually stopped near the gasoline pumps. The reason the vehicle stopped is disputed. Officer Cravens testified that he spoke to the vehicle occupants without ordering the vehicle to stop. Mr. Siddiqui described Officer Cravens as very active, running toward the vehicle in an aggressive manner, saying "[h]old on" or "[s]top." Zelinski testified that Officer Cravens ran toward the moving vehicle waving his hand and telling the occupants to stop.
Both Officer Cravens and Zelinski testified that Officer Cravens asked Zelinski to step out of the vehicle. Zelinski testified that he did not feel free to leave. Officer Cravens then obtained Zelinski's identification, ran a check for warrants, and determined there was an outstanding warrant for Zelinski. Officer Cravens arrested Zelinski based on the warrant. Thereafter, Officer Cravens searched Zelinski's person and discovered marijuana.
In Zelinski's motion to suppress, he alleged that the stop was illegal. The trial court denied Zelinski's motion to suppress, finding that the confrontation between Zelinski and Officer Cravens was a "consensual encounter," rather than a seizure. Zelinski entered a plea of no contest reserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. The parties stipulated that the motion to suppress was dispositive of the case, and the trial court so found.
It is not necessary to address the trial court's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cox v. State
...a reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal activity connected to Appellant. To support the motion, counsel cited Zelinski v. State, 695 So.2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (concluding that an investigatory stop was unlawful because the officer who responded to a report of a "suspicious person......
- US Sec. Ins. Co. v. Cimino
- Maraman v. State
-
Thomasset v. State, 2D99-2309.
...an investigatory detention when the deputy requested Thomasset to step out of his vehicle. As Judge Parker observed in Zelinski v. State, 695 So.2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), "if there was a consensual encounter, it became an investigatory stop at the point where Officer Cravens asked Zelinski......
-
What to Do Before and After the Defense Medical Exam
...to perform the exam with the third party present. See Wilkins v. Palumbo, 617 So. 2d 850, 854 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); see also Broyles, 695 So. 2d at 834. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff moves the Court for an order compelling the Defendant to grant permission for a court reporter to attend the entire exa......
-
What to Do Before and After the Defense Medical Exam
...to perform the exam with the third party present. See Wilkins v. Palumbo , 617 So. 2d 850, 854 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); see also Broyles , 695 So. 2d at 834. WHEREFORE , Plaintiff moves the Court for an order compelling the Defendant to grant permission for a court reporter to attend the entire ......