KEVIN MARTIN, 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.
Kevin Martin appeals his conviction for possession of heroin, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress. The appellate court reversed, holding that Martin's arrest was unlawful because it was based on an outstanding warrant that had already been served and should have been removed from the police computer before the stop.
The court held that the trial court improperly denied Martin's motion to suppress. The arrest was unlawful because Officer Vaney relied solely on erroneous radio information about the warrant, which was void at the time of arrest. The seized contraband should have been suppressed as fruit of the unlawful arrest.
[1] An arrest based solely on erroneous information indicating an outstanding warrant is illegal if the warrant was void at the time of the arrest.
[2] An otherwise illegal arrest cannot be justified by the arresting officer's reliance on erroneous radio information.
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“An otherwise illegal arrest cannot be insulated from challenge by the fact that the executing officer relied on erroneous radio information dispatched by a fellow officer or employee.”
Establishes that reliance on erroneous computer/radio dispatch information does not justify an arrest based on a void warrant
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn November 3, 1980, Officer Vaney stopped a vehicle for running a red light. The driver was arrested for lacking a driver's license. The officer requ…
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 Possession Of Heroin cases and more on FLexlaw
OTT, Chief Judge.
Kevin Martin appeals his judgment and sentence for possession of heroin, contending that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We reverse.
On December 4, 1980, the state charged appellant with possession of heroin contrary to section 893.13(l)(e), Florida Statutes (1979). Appellant filed a motion to suppress which was denied by the trial court after a hearing on the motion. Appellant pled nolo contendere, reserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. The court sentenced appellant to three years probation.
On November 3, 1980, Officer Vaney observed a vehicle run a red light. The officer stopped the vehicle. The driver was unable to produce a driver’s license and was thereupon arrested. The officer requested appellant, who was a passenger in the car, for identification. Appellant voluntarily gave the officer his driver’s license. The officer called for a computer check on the appellant which indicated an outstanding warrant for appellant’s arrest under an Alabama charge. The officer arrested appellant based upon the warrant. The officer then searched appellant and took a brown pouch from his pants pocket. The pouch contained minute particles of residue which subsequently were established as a mixture of cocaine and heroin.
At the suppression hearing, the state conceded all the foregoing facts and that the warrant had been served on appellant on February 6, 1980; that appellant had been incarcerated in Alabama and released on October 16, 1980. The warrant, however, was not removed from the Tampa police computer until the day after appellant was stopped by Officer Vaney and a check of appellant’s story proved accurate.
We hold that the trial court improperly denied appellant’s motion to suppress. Officer Vaney did not have independent probable cause to arrest appellant. The officer relied solely on erroneous information received by radio that there was an outstanding Alabama warrant for appellant’s arrest. The warrant was void at the time appellant was arrested. An otherwise illegal arrest cannot be insulated from challenge by the fact that the executing officer relied on erroneous radio information dispatched by a fellow officer or employee. Whiteley v. Warden of Wyoming Penitentiary, 401 U.S. 560, 91 S.Ct. 1031, 28 L.Ed.2d 306 (1971). A void or nonexisting warrant cannot be the basis for a legal arrest and search. Pesci v. State, 420 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). Since the contraband was seized pursuant to an unlawful arrest, it should have been suppressed as a fruit thereof. DeBord v. State, 422 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
Based upon the specific facts of this case, we REVERSE the denial of appellant’s motion to suppress and subsequent judgment and sentence for possession of heroin.
RYDER and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Carroll v. State, 497 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…g warrant existed (which did not exist until after the arrest), the arrest and, thus, seizure, must be declared invalid under the settled law that a void or nonexistent warrant may not be the basis for a legal arrest and search. See Martin v. State, 424 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Pesci v. State, 420 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The defendant’s argument, however, misses the mark. The state here is not relying on a nonexistent warrant but rather upon the probable cause held by Parmenter. The incorrect con…
-
McGEE v. State, 435 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…e absence of probable cause for issuance of the warrant upon which the arrest was effected requires suppression of the evidence. Whiteley v. Warden of Wyoming Penitentiary, 401 U.S. 560, 91 S.Ct. 1081, 28 L.Ed.2d 306 (1971); and see Martin v. State, 424 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983) (evidence suppressed where arresting officer had no independent probable cause, but arrested appellant on an Alabama warrant which was void because accused had already been arrested on that warrant, incarcerated in Alabama, and r…
-
State v. Schafer, 583 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…3. That the officer relied solely on the information that there was an outstand [*376] ing warrant; however, a void warrant may not be the basis for a legal arrest and search. State v. Gifford, [558 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)]; Martin v. State, 424 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Pesci v. State, 420 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). 4. That F.S. 948.06 authorizes modification of terms and conditions within the probationary period, but does not authorize extension of the period. Patrick v. State, 336 So. 2d…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Whiteley v. Warden, Wyo. State Penitentiary, 401 U.S. 560 (U.S. 1971)
- Pesci v. State, 420 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Debord v. State, 422 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)