ALAN R. MOLINE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1981-10-13
No. YY-199
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and McCORD, J., concur.
404 So. 2d 826 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1981) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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 officer's command to sit up was a limited intrusion, and the contraband was in open view, justifying seizure under the automobile exception.


Facts & Procedural History

Police found controlled substances in Moline's car after he made furtive movements and appeared to be hiding something. The officer ordered Moline to …

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
MILLS, Judge.

MILLS, Judge.

Moline appeals the denial of his motion to suppress controlled substances found in his car. We affirm.

However, we expressly decline to affirm the “good-faith” exception to the exclusionary rule as found by the trial court. We note specifically this court’s opinion in Walden v. State, 397 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), 1981 F.L.W. 833, which held that we are precluded from considering such an exception until it is adopted by the Florida Supreme Court.

We find that the police officer’s command for Moline to sit up from his prone position on the car seat, considering the furtive movements of Moline, the area where the vehicle was located, the time of night, and the fact that Moline appeared to be trying to stuff something between the car seats, was such a limited intrusion that there was no constitutional violation by the officers. Once Moline sat up, the contraband was in “open view” and subject to seizure under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. Ensor v. State, 403 So. 2d 349 (Fla.1981), Case No. 57,817, opinion filed June 4, 1981.

Accordingly, the trial court’s order is affirmed.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and McCORD, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Thomas, 405 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
    …67 L.Ed.2d 114 (1981), that evidence which is objectively determined to have been unconstitutionally and unreasonably secured may nevertheless be admitted if the officers were acting in subjective “good faith” at the time. See also, Moline v. State, 404 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Walden v. State, 397 So .2d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw