STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
RICHARD JOHN MARZANO AND RICHARD MICHAEL LECLAIRE, APPELLEES

Fla. 4th DCA | 1982-08-25
No. 82-653
DOWNEY, HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
418 So. 2d 1159 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1982) 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 an investigatory stop of a vessel is lawful if based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, not solely on presence in customs waters.


Facts & Procedural History

Officers stopped a boat and found contraband. The trial court initially found the stop justified by articulable suspicion but later suppressed the evi…

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.

The state appeals an order suppressing physical evidence. We conclude that the trial court misapprehended the appropriate rule of law and, consequently, we reverse.

This case involves the suppression of contraband found aboard a boat. Initially, the trial court ruled that the stop of the vessel was justified because the officers had an articulable suspicion of criminal activity. Subsequently, however, the court reversed its decision and suppressed the evidence on the theory that “an investigatory stop, even when based on a reasonable suspicion of law violation, is illegal unless the vessel was initially seen in customs waters.” We respectfully disagree.

A stop of a vessel may be justified if there is evidence that the vessel has recently crossed the border or there is evidence giving rise to an articulable suspicion that the defendants were engaged in illegal activity. State v. Doyle, 409 So. 2d 1168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); State v. Zafra, 408 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Morales v. State, 407 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Having found a lawful justification for the stop, the trial court erred in requiring proof that the vessel was seen in customs waters. Accordingly, the order of suppression is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DOWNEY, HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Elio Millet and Lazaro Gonzalez, 432 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
    …onable trustworthy information, sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution to believe that an offense had been or was being committed. The governing principle as to the initial stop of the boat is contained in State v. Marzano, 418 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982): A stop of a vessel may be justified if there is evidence that the vessel has recently crossed the border or there is evidence giving rise to an articulable suspicion that the defendants were engaged in illegal activity. State v…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw