TERRY LEE JENKINS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Terry Lee Jenkins was convicted of cocaine possession after police conducted a stop and frisk based solely on him placing his hand behind his back in a high-crime area. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the police lacked the articulable suspicion necessary to justify the stop and frisk under the Fourth Amendment.
The court held that the facts presented an insufficient basis for the stop and frisk. The presence in a high-crime area and the gesture of placing one's hand behind one's back do not constitute founded suspicion required by law, and the motion to suppress should have been granted.
[1] A police officer's bare suspicion that illegal activity is afoot does not support the detention of an individual.
[2] To justify a temporary detention, an officer must have a founded, articulable suspicion that the individual has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“To justify a temporary detention the officer must have a founded, articulable suspicion that the individual has committed, is committing, or is about to commit, a crime.”
Establishes the legal standard required to stop an individual
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJenkins and a companion were walking briskly on a public street at night in a busy commercial district. Police were conducting an 'area check' of a ne…
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 High Crime Area cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
The defendant, Terry Lee Jenkins, appeals a jury conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine which followed the denial of his motion to suppress the evidence. We reverse.
The defendant and a companion were walking briskly along a public street at night in a busy commercial district. The police were conducting an “area check” of the neighborhood which was known to have a high crime rate. Solely because Jenkins placed his left hand behind his back as if to put something into his pants, the police singled him out for a stop and pat-down search. The police ordered Jenkins to place his hands against the police car while a frisk was conducted; no weapon was found. During the pat-down search Jenkins dropped a white paper napkin which, when retrieved, was found to contain packets of cocaine. Because these facts form an insufficient basis for a stop and frisk, the court should have granted Jenkins’ motion to suppress.
It is well established that a police officer’s bare suspicion that illegal activity is afoot does not support the detention of an individual. Coladonato v. State, 348 So. 2d 326 (Fla.1977).
To justify a temporary detention the officer must have a founded, articulable suspicion that the individual has committed, is committing, or is about to commit, a crime. Levin v. State, 449 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), approved, 452 So. 2d 562 (Fla.1984); § 901.151, Fla.Stat. (1987). “A ‘founded’ suspicion is one which has some factual foundation in the circumstances observed by the officer when those circumstances are interpreted in light of the officer’s knowledge.” G.J.P. v. State, 469 So. 2d 826, 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
An individual’s presence in a high crime area is not a sufficient basis upon which to conclude he is engaged in, or about to commit, a crime. Ward v. State, 453 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
Furthermore, the defendant’s action in placing his hand behind his back was an insufficient basis to raise a bare suspicion to a founded suspicion. See R.B. v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (fact that defendant quickly placed his hand in pocket after seeing police car did not give rise to founded suspicion).
Reversed and remanded with instructions to discharge the defendant.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Dees v. State, 564 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…ve rise to a founded suspicion”); Ruddack v. State, 537 So. 2d 701, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (that appellant moved his hand behind his back did not reasonably raise suspicion of criminal activity or pose threat to officer’s safety); Jenkins v. State, 524 So. 2d 1108, 1109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (that appellant put his hand behind back when officers were checking the area was not enough to justify stop and pat-down); Walker v. State, 514 So. 2d 1149, 1150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (appellant’s quick movement, “ ‘as if to c…
-
Johnson v. State, 610 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…1987). Appellant’s placing his hand in his pocket, without more, did not justify the stop, Dees, 564 So. 2d at 1168, even though the neighborhood was known to have a high crime rate. J.D. v. State, 568 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Jenkins v. State, 524 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Cf. State v. Anderson, 591 So. 2d 611 (Fla.1992) (undercover officers saw series of hand transactions apparently distributing something among pedestrians and drivers, and defendant threw an object into [*584] a nearby planter and…
-
Amin Ruddack v. State, 537 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…authorized by section 901.151, Florida Statutes, or Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Accordingly, the judgment and sentence are reversed. See Baggett v. State, 531 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Jenkins v. State, 524 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); R.B. v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Coladonato v. State, 348 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 1977)
- G.J.P. v. State, 469 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- In the Interest of R.B. v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Yates v. State, 429 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- State v. Levin, 452 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1984)
- Levin v. State, 449 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Ward v. State, 453 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)