JAMES ROBERT ISHAM, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Police conducted a warrantless search of Isham based on an anonymous tip describing a drug dealer at a specific location. The court reversed the conviction, holding that while police had the right to investigate and stop Isham based on the detailed tip and his flight, the immediate search without consent or probable cause was illegal.
Police had the right to investigate the anonymous tip and stop Isham based on the detailed description, his presence at the described location, and his flight from the officer. However, the immediate search without consent, probable cause for arrest, or information that Isham was armed violated the Fourth Amendment and was illegal.
[1] An anonymous tip, while not sufficient on its own to justify a stop and frisk, may nonetheless prompt police investigation.
[2] When police receive a detailed anonymous tip describing a suspect at a specific location, and the suspect matches the description and is present at that location, police…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“if an unidentified caller told the police that an accurately described, flipped-out, disgruntled client was on the way to the public defender's office to kill the occupants, all would enthusiastically thank the police for investigating the tip and making a stop”
Illustrates that police are not required to ignore anonymous tips and may investigate them when they concern public safety or serious crimes
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn anonymous caller informed police that Isham was attempting to sell drugs at a specific street corner, providing a detailed physical description inc…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Anonymous Tip Reliability cases and more on FLexlaw
LETTS, Judge.
This appeal arises from a denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained through a police search following a telephone call from an anonymous tipster. We reverse.
An anonymous telephone call to the police advised that appellant was, at that moment, on a certain street corner attempting to sell drugs to two females. In a detailed description the informant described appellant as a young, black male, approximately 5'8" tall, wearing a bluejean Levi cap with a bill, a bluejean Levi jacket with no shirt, and blue flannel plaid pants. Plainclothed detectives immediately went to the scene where they spotted the appellant walking toward them. One officer exited his vehicle, identified himself, and stated that he wanted to talk to the appellant. Thereupon appellant, who was approximately three feet from the detective, attempted to flee and the officer detained him. A search of his person revealed cocaine in a container exactly as described during the telephone call.
We have not forgotten that we have recently held that an anonymous tip will not, without more, support implementation of the stop and frisk law, St. John v. State, 363 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), but that is not to say the police are required to ignore such a tip altogether. Indeed, if an unidentified caller told the police that an accurately described, flipped-out, disgruntled client was on the way to the public defender’s office to kill the occupants, all would enthusiastically thank the police for investigating the tip and making a stop. Both the Second and Third Districts have so held in cases involving dangerous weapons. State v. Francois, 355 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) and State v. Hetland, 366 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).
Adapting this rationale to the case at bar, the police had a perfect right, and perhaps a duty, to investigate the call. When they then saw the, described in detail, appellant at the very location, we believe they also had a right to talk to him.1 As they attempted to do so the appellant ran away which reaction in our view, coupled with all that had gone before, created a founded suspicion sufficient to justify a stop. Of the eight criteria set forth in our recent decision in Lacks v. State, 366 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA, 1979), we find six to be applicable here.
The problem remains as to whether an immediate search without arrest, or further investigation, was authorized and we think it was not. There was no information to suggest that the appellant might be armed with a dangerous weapon (such as was the case in Hetland and Francois) nor was there probable cause for arrest for possession of cocaine BEFORE the search. Furthermore the record does not reflect any consent to the search conducted (as was the case in St. John). We are therefore of the opinion that the officers moved too fast and that the search was illegal. We are also of the opinion, however, that had the anonymous tip included information that the appellant was armed, a frisk would have been justified. See Hetland, supra.
THE JUDGMENT IS REVERSED AND REMANDED IN ACCORDANCE HEREWITH.
ANSTEAD and MOORE, JJ., concur. . The very explicit detail of the description in and of itself supplied some reliability to the BOLO (see Hetland, supra, at p. 833).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
State v. Webb, 398 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1981)…present case, the Fourth District has modified its view regarding BOLOs based on anonymous tips. Adopting the rationale of Hetland and State v. Francois, 355 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 361 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1978), in Isham v. State, 369 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 381 So. 2d 770 (Fla.1980), it held that, based upon an anonymous call to police advising that defendant was on a certain street corner attempting to sell drugs, the police had a perfect right, and perhaps a duty, t…
-
Hetland v. State, 387 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1980)…Court of Appeal, Fourth District, however, relied on State v. Hendry in reaching a negative response to this question. St. John v. State, 363 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). But cf. Byrd v. State, 380 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Isham v. State, 369 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). Conflict jurisdiction therefore vests in this Court pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution (1972). We agree with the District Court of Appeal, Second District, that an inflexible rule based on the anonymo…
-
State v. PYE, 551 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…2d 1180 (Fla.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1011, 106 S.Ct. 541, 88 L.Ed.2d 471 (1985); State v. Bell, 382 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (defendant in high-crime area seen peering from alley into window of apartment, coupled with flight); Isham v. State, 369 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979) (anonymous tip detailing defendant and an impending drug sale, coupled with flight), cert. denied, 381 So. 2d 770 (Fla.1980), receded from on other grounds, In the Interest of G.A.R., 387 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Gibson v.…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Hetland, 366 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- ST. John v. State, 363 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- State v. Francois, 355 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Black v. State, 366 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Lachs v. State, 366 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)