MANUEL ANGEL LABRADA, JR., MANUEL ANGEL LABRADA-BELLO, RAUL JULIO FRIAS, IRENE WILLIAMS SANDER, AND MAGALIS CAMEJO, APPELLANTS,
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.
The court affirmed the denial of motions to suppress evidence from searches conducted pursuant to search warrants, holding that the affidavits supporting the warrant applications contained sufficient probable cause under the Machado standard.
Affidavits supporting search warrants for lottery statute violations contained sufficient probable cause to satisfy the Machado standard.
[1] Affidavits supporting search warrant applications must contain sufficient factual detail to establish probable cause under the Machado standard.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFive appellants were charged with violations of lottery statutes and entered nolo contendere pleas while reserving the right to appeal the denial of m…
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 United States V. Leon cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The five appellants in this case were charged with various violations of the lottery statutes and entered pleas of nolo contendere pursuant to a negotiated agreement with the state. The appellants specifically reserved their right to appeal the trial court’s denial of their motions to suppress evidence obtained from searches of two residences. The parties stipulated, and the trial court agreed, that the motions to suppress were dispositive of the case. The gravamen of the appeal concerns the alleged deficiency of the affidavits submitted by the investigating police officers m support of their application for search warrants. The appellants claim that the affidavits failed to provide the requisite probable cause to support the trial court’s issuance of the search warrants. Having carefully reviewed each of the lengthy, detailed affidavits, we conclude that they satisfy the standard established by this court in Machado v. State, 363 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 373 So. 2d 459 (Fla.1979).
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the motions to suppress and affirm the convictions and sentences entered upon the appellants’ pleas. Our finding that the trial court correctly denied the motions to suppress on the merits obviates the need for us to address appellants’ alternative argument that the good faith exception of United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984), does not pertain to this case.
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Bill Williams AIR Conditioning & Heating, Inc. v. Haymarket Coop. Bank, 592 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…d upon their merits.” Adams v. Knabb Turpentine Co., 435 So. 2d 944, 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Courts should be especially liberal when leave to amend “is sought at or before a hearing on a motion for summary judgment.” Montero v. Compugraphic Corp., 531 So. 2d 1034, 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). As a general rule, refusal to allow amendment of a pleading constitutes an abuse of discretion unless it clearly appears that allowing the amendment would prejudice the opposing party; the privilege to amend has been abused…
-
Gate Lands Co. v. OLD Ponte Vedra Beach Condo., 715 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…Adams v. Knabb Turpentine Co., 435 So. 2d 944, 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)). Courts should be especially liberal when leave to amend “is sought at or before a hearing on a motion for summary judgment.” Id. at 305 (quoting Montero v. Compugraphic Corp., 531 So. 2d 1034, 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)). Further, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190(e) instructs that “[a]t every stage of the action the court must disregard any error or defect in the proceedings which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.”…
-
Indem. Ins. Co. OF N. Am. a/s/o Unidas Sys., Inc. v. Chambers, 732 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…t Indemnity has taken inconsistent positions in this litigation with respect to attorney’s fees and should, therefore, be estopped from arguing the inapplicability of the prevailing party attorney’s fee clause. We deem Montero v. Compugraphic Corp., 531 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), where a defendant in a contract action was estopped from denying the existence of contract relying on the same contract for a shortened limitation of action period, inapposite. We recognize that Appellant initially pled entitleme…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984)
- MacHado v. State, 363 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)