HERBERT L. WOOD, III, 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.
Herbert Wood was convicted of three counts of obtaining property by worthless checks and sentenced to probation with special conditions. He appealed the harshness of the conditions and the constitutionality of an unrestricted search provision, which the court partially upheld and partially struck down as violating the Fourth Amendment.
The conditions prohibiting checks, requiring physical examination, and authorizing searches by probation supervisors are valid and reasonably related to rehabilitation and public protection. However, the portion of the search condition authorizing warrantless searches by law enforcement officers violates the Fourth Amendment and Florida Constitution, and therefore that portion is struck down.
[1] Probation conditions requiring a probationer to refrain from possessing checking accounts and blank checks are reasonably related to the offense of obtaining property by…
[2] A probation condition requiring a probationer to submit to physical examination for drugs upon request is reasonably related to the offense and promotes rehabilitation.
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“the conditions concerning checks and physical examination are not unduly harsh and restrictive, but are reasonably related to the offense and provide a standard of conduct essentially promoting this probationer's rehabilitation in addition to protection of the public”
Establishes the test for valid special probation conditions: reasonable relation to the offense and promotion of rehabilitation and public protection
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Wood was convicted of three counts of obtaining property of value by means of worthless checks. Evidence showed that Wood has a drinking pro…
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 Appeal Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of three counts of obtaining property of value by means of worthless checks. This appeal from the sentences to terms of probation challenges the following special conditions on appellant’s probation: that he not have a checking account; that he not be in possession of blank checks; that he submit to physical examination for the presence of drugs upon the request of any probation supervisor or law enforcement officer; and that he submit to a search at any time, by any probation supervisor and any law enforcement officer of his person and all vehicles and premises concerning which he has legal standing to consent to search. Appellant contends the conditions are unduly harsh and restrictive; and that the search condition is constitutionally invalid.
The evidence before the lower tribunal showed that appellant has a drinking problem and is generally inattentive in his check writing when he is drinking. The conditions concerning checks and physical examination are not unduly harsh and restrictive, but are reasonably related to the offense and provide a standard of conduct essentially promoting this probationer’s rehabilitation in addition to protection of the public. See Heatherly v. State, 343 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
As for the search condition, the orders are valid insofar as they relate to searches by the probation supervisor. State v. Heath, 343 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 893, 98 S.Ct. 269, 54 L.Ed.2d 179 (1977); Grubbs v. State, 373 So. 2d 905 (Fla.1979); Pace v. State, 373 So. 2d 911 (Fla.1979). However, to the extent the search condition “intends to grant greater authority to law enforcement officers to conduct a warrantless search, a unilateral search condition set forth in an order of probation requiring a probationer to consent at any time to a warrantless search is a violation of the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution and article I, section 12, of the Florida Constitution.” Grubbs, supra at 907. Accordingly, the conditions of the probation orders are affirmed, except for the portion of the condition authorizing warrantless search at any time by law enforcement officers, which is reversed.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and SHARP, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Elkins v. State, 388 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…his condition is too broad insofar as it permits warrantless searches by any law enforcement officer, but is correct insofar as it permits such searches by appellant’s probation supervisor. Grubbs v. State, 373 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 1979); Wood v. State, 378 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Smith v. State, 383 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). [*1317] Condition 11 of the probation order is therefore modified to apply only to appellant’s probation supervisors, and as modified, the judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.…
-
Smith v. State, 383 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…r as it permits appellant’s probation supervisors to make these searches, but is not valid insofar as it grants blanket permission for warrantless searches to other law enforcement officers. Grubbs v. State, 373 So. 2d 905 (Fla.1979); Wood v. State, 378 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Condition (11) of the probation order is modified to apply only to probation supervisors, and as modified, the judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH, C. J., and SHARP, J., concur.…
-
Ethingor Wilzo Warren v. State, 547 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…ermission for warrantless searches and seizures to all law enforcement officers. See Grubbs v. State, 373 So. 2d 905 (Fla.1979); Elkins v. State, 388 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Smith v. State, 383 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Wood v. State, 378 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Grubbs v. State, 373 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 1979)
- State v. Heath, 343 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1977)
- Heatherly v. State, 343 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Heath v. Florida, 434 U.S. 893 (U.S. 1977)
- Bennett v. Director of Internal Revenue for North Carolina, 434 U.S. 893 (U.S. 1977)
- Pace v. State, 373 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1979)
- Isaacs v. State, 373 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1979)