STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
EDDIE LEE COLEMAN, 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.
The court held that contraband observed in plain view from a lawful vantage point could be lawfully seized without a warrant.
Officers were executing a search warrant at the defendant's residence when they observed contraband in the defendant's car parked outside. The state a…
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 Open View Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Judge.
The state appeals an order granting a motion to suppress marijuana and cocaine taken from the defendant’s automobile by the police without a warrant. We reverse.
The defendant arrived at his residence, and parked on the street, while officers were conducting a search of his house pursuant to a warrant. There is some dispute as to what happened next. According to the state, two officers approached the defendant, who was standing by his car yelling. While questioning him, one of the officers observed the contraband in the car. According to the defendant, he had left the car and was at his house, when an officer on discovering the drugs told another policeman to take him inside. However, in either event it is undisputed that the officer inadvertently discovered the contraband on the front seat of the car from a lawful vantage point.
The state does not contend that the search warrant authorized the seizure of the contraband from the car, but instead claims the seizure was permissible under the open view doctrine. See Ensor v. State, 403 So. 2d 349 (Fla.1981); State v. Melendez, 392 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Considering the totality of the circumstances, the officers reasonably concluded that the defendant’s vehicle contained marijuana. The drugs, under these circumstances, could then be lawfully seized without a warrant. See Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct. 1975, 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L.Ed. 543 (1925); Adoue v. State, 408 So. 2d 567 (Fla.1981); State v. Smith, 441 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), rev. denied, 450 So. 2d 488 (Fla.1984).
Therefore, the order granting the appel-lee’s motion to suppress is reversed and this cause is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.
ANSTEAD and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Hughes, 562 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…h a way that they, with the aid of a flashlight, were able to clearly see the crack cocaine on the floorboard of the vehicle, were entitled to lawfully seize the cocaine without a warrant. State v. Ashby, 245 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1971); State v. Coleman, 502 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); State v. Milmoe, 541 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); State v. Hall, 352 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); United States v. Lara, 517 F. 2d 209 (5th Cir.1975). 1 LaFave, Search and Seizure (2d ed.), § 2.2(b); 14 Fla.Jur.2d, Crimina…
-
State v. Waterman, 638 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…in custody); State v. Starkey, 559 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (where defendant in custody, warrantless search of his car known to be on public parking lot proper where probable cause provided by open view of pistol cartridges); State v. Coleman, 502 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986) (open view of contraband in defendant’s car parked on street in front of his residence justified warrantless seizure). Adding to the exigent circumstances created by the ready mobility of the Renault was the fact that just at th…
-
State v. Lavictor Bernard Williams, 739 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…79 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); State v. Starkey, 559 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); State v. Barcenas, 559 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), rev. den., 569 So. 2d 1278 (Fla.1990); State v. Wells, 516 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); State v. Coleman, 502 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). See also Adoue v. State, 408 So. 2d 567 (Fla.1981). It is not the conve nience of the police which is being catered to, nor is it an aid to more expeditious law enforcement which is being achieved. Rather, it is a recognition th…
Authorities Cited
- Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (U.S. 1925)
- Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 (U.S. 1970)
- Elton E. Ensor v. State, 403 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1981)
- State v. Melendez, 392 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Nile M. Marriott, Jr. v. Venetian Cove Club, Inc., 408 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1980)
- State v. Smith, 441 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)