WILLIE PLANT, 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.
Willie Plant challenges the suppression denial of evidence obtained during a traffic stop. The court affirms, holding that Officer Mundy had probable cause to stop Plant's vehicle based on its match to the description of a getaway car used in a recent armed robbery.
Officer Mundy had probable cause to stop the automobile. The vehicle fit a known pattern of similar robberies, the circumstances involved light traffic on the logical escape route, and the additional description details provided probable cause for the investigatory stop.
[1] A police officer has probable cause to stop a vehicle when the vehicle matches the modus operandi of recent robberies and is observed on a logical escape route shortly af…
[2] The presence of a suspect matching a description provided in a bolo, combined with the suspect's vehicle fitting a pattern associated with similar crimes, can establish p…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Upon consideration of all the facts we are of the opinion that Officer Mundy had probable cause to stop this automobile. His activity on this night strikes us as good police work.”
The court's ultimate holding and conclusion regarding the legality of the traffic stop and the officer's conduct.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTwo black men robbed a gas station in Arlington, Florida at approximately 2 a.m. on November 20, 1980. Police were alerted to watch for two black men,…
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 Flight As Evidence Of Guilt cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Just before 2 a. m. on the morning of November 20, 1980, two black men held up a gas station in the Jacksonville suburb of Arlington. Within 30 seconds of the robbers’ leaving, the police were notified to be on the lookout for two black men. Although no auto was mentioned the robbery matched the modus operandi of several recent robberies in the Arlington area in which the robbers fled in a blue medium sized sedan. Upon receiving the bolo, and aware of the previous robberies, Officer Mundy positioned his patrol car where he could see all traffic coming off the Arlington Expressway into the Jacksonville downtown area. This was the logical escape route and was lightly traveled at the time. As the bolo was improved by the additional information that one robber had worn a brown shirt Mundy observed a blue 1976 Volare coming from Arlington. He saw that the passenger was wearing a brown shirt. Both the passenger and driver were black males.
As Mundy started to follow the Volare the driver attempted flight. After a half mile chase the Volare stopped. The driver started away on foot, halting when ordered to by Mundy, who had drawn his revolver. The passenger also started away and was stopped. Both were confined to the patrol car and read their rights. Mundy was informed by radio that the stolen items were a white trash bag of cigarette cartons and a brown paper bag of money. A white trash bag of cigarette cartons was visible through the car window. A brown bag was under the seat although visible. Mundy entered the car and opened the brown bag, finding money in the proper denominations. The two men were then taken to the crime scene where they were identified by the station attendant. They were then formally arrested.
Plant, the driver and owner of the car and the appellant here, moved to suppress the cigarettes, money, identification, and a subsequent confession as products of an unlawful stop, which motion was denied. He also challenged the confession as involuntary but waived that issue later, Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla.1979); Wood v. State, 399 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Plant, unlike his co-defendant, Thomas, pled nolo reserving the right to appeal the suppression issue.
The issue here is whether there was probable cause for the stopping of the automobile by Officer Mundy. The appellant relies on our decision in L.T.S. v. State, 391 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). That case is distinguished by the facts that this auto fit a known pattern of similar robberies, the lightness of the traffic in the case sub judi-ce and the logic of the expressway as an escape route. Cf. Franklin v. State, 374 So. 2d 1151 (Fla.3rd DCA 1979). Upon consideration of all the facts we are of the opinion that Officer Mundy had probable cause to stop this automobile. His activity on this night strikes us as good police work.
The judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.
BOOTH, LARRY G. SMITH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Jones, 417 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…occurred, we have not considered appellees’ final suspicious act which occurred in the City of Melbourne, when all three passengers ducked down below the vehicle’s windows and out of sight. . For a factually similar recent case, see Plant v. State, 407 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). See also State v. Perera, 412 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 2d [*796] DCA 1982). The law normally contemplates the solution of a legal problem by using an applicable constitutional or statutory provision or prior case adopting a rule or prin…
-
Cobb v. State, 642 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…that hour, the number of available escape routes, and the temporal and geographical proximity of the location of the stop to the crime site itself are all factors relevant to the determination of whether a founded suspicion existed. Plant v. State, 407 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), rev. den., 417 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1982); L.T.S. v. State, 391 So. 2d 695, 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Gibson v. State, 486 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). In support of reversal, Appellants have cited a number of cases involving urb…
-
Hezekiah H. James, III v. State, 556 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…d. at 1154. When viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, the factors applied by the officer in the present case provided no more than a bare suspicion that appellant had committed the robbery. Compare, Franklin v. State; Plant v. State, 407 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), review denied, 417 So. 2d 330 (Fla.1982); L.T.S. v. State, 391 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); and Romanoff v. State, 391 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court erred in denying appellant…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1979)
- Franklin v. State, 374 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- L. T. S. v. State, 391 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Wood v. State, 399 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Johnson v. State, 399 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)