JAMES PATRICK GILLESPIE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1981-09-22
No. 79-2233
Before HENDRY and FERGUSON, JJ., and VANN, HAROLD R. (Ret.), Associate Judge.
404 So. 2d 152 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1981)

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence seized from the appellant's automobile.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of possession of Methaqualone and sought to suppress evidence seized from his automobile, arguing the search and subsequent ar…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of his conviction of possession of Methaqualone. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying the motions to suppress evidence seized from an automobile belonging to appellant since such search was unlawful and the arrest of appellant and his subsequent statements were the direct products of the unlawful seizure under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States.

Appellant strongly argued that Pomerantz v. State, 372 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. den., app. dism., 386 So. 2d 642 (Fla.1980), is controlling. We cannot agree. We reject the contention on the grounds that (1) the initial stop was proper under State v. Hetland, 366 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), aff’d, 387 So. 2d 963 (Fla.1980); (2) the police officer directed appellant to pull over to an area where the appellant was intending to go; (3) the search was conducted by a private employer; unlike in Pomerantz the police officer here took no active participation in the search.

We have carefully considered all of appellant’s contentions in the light of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel and have concluded that no reversible error has been demonstrated. McNamara v. State, 357 So. 2d 410 (Fla.1978); Bernovich v. State, 272 So. 2d 505 (Fla.1973); Wigfall v. State, 323 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw