JEFFREY ABRAHAM, 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.
Jeffrey Abraham appealed his conviction for drug possession and related offenses, challenging the lawfulness of the police stop that led to the discovery of contraband. The court reversed, finding that the officer lacked a founded suspicion of criminal activity to justify the initial traffic stop.
Officer Kelly did not have a founded suspicion of criminal activity. The acts of driving out of a business parking lot late at night and picking up another person are insufficient to create a founded suspicion of past, present, or future criminal activity, and therefore the motion to suppress should have been granted.
[1] A founded suspicion of criminal activity justifying a police stop requires observations that, when considered with the officer's knowledge, reasonably indicate the suspec…
[2] Driving out of a business parking lot late at night and picking up another person does not, in itself, constitute a founded suspicion of criminal activity.
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“A suspicion of criminal activity is founded when it arises out of observations of the police officer which, when considered in the light of the officer's knowledge, reasonably indicate that the suspect is committing, is about to commit, or has committed a criminal violation.”
Establishes the legal standard for what constitutes a founded suspicion justifying a police stop.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn March 1, 1987, at 3:00 a.m., Officer Kelly observed Abraham drive out of a parking lot behind a closed insurance company and pick up a white female…
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 Hashish cases and more on FLexlaw
COOK, JACK H., Associate Judge.
Jeffrey Abraham appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence for possession of hashish, cannabis and drug paraphernalia and for driving on a suspended license and loitering and prowling. Appellant filed a pretrial motion to suppress a statement made to the police and physical evidence seized at the time of his arrest. The motion was denied and appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere reserving his right to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress. For the reasons set forth below, we find that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress and that the case should be reversed and remanded.
The facts as developed at the suppression hearing are that on March 1, 1987, at approximately 3:00 a.m., Officer Kelly of the Wilton Manor Police Department observed appellant drive out of a parking lot located behind a closed insurance company and pick up a white female who was walking away from the business. The officer followed appellant’s vehicle for approximately three blocks and observed nothing unusual about either the vehicle or the way appellant was driving. Officer Kelly then stopped appellant, discovered he had a suspended driver’s license, and arrested him for that violation. A search of appellant’s car revealed hashish, cannabis and drug paraphernalia.
The question presented is whether Officer Kelly had a founded suspicion of criminal activity justifying the initial stop of appellant.
A suspicion of criminal activity is founded when it arises out of observations of the police officer which, when considered in the light of the officer’s knowledge, reasonably indicate that the suspect is committing, is about to commit, or has committed a criminal violation. Butterworth v. State, 522 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); State v. Stevens, 354 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); § 901.151(2), Fla.Stat. (1985). The acts of driving out of a business parking lot late at night and picking up another person are not sufficient to create a founded suspicion of past, present or future criminal activity. Accordingly, the motion to suppress should have been granted.
The judgment and sentence are reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mayhue v. State, 659 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…a well-founded, articulable suspicion of criminal activity. Popple, 626 So. 2d at 186. The officer’s observations must reasonably indicate that the defendant is committing, is about to commit or has committed a criminal violation. Abraham v. State, 532 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988). A mere or bare suspicion is not sufficient. Smith, 592 So. 2d at 1207. Here, the only basis for the stop was that the officer saw Mayhue, over the course [*419] of an hour, pushing a shopping cart containing a television around…
-
Jamall Graham v. State, 714 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…nt and another in car parked in driveway at 1:08 a.m. with interior light on in area where there had previously been a number of home burglaries does not create reasonable suspicion of criminal activity sufficient to justify stop); Abraham v. State, 532 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (observing defendant drive out of parking lot located behind closed insurance company at 3:00 a.m. and pick up female who was walking away from business does not create reasonable suspicion of criminal activity sufficient to just…
-
Aguila v. State, 567 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…bservation of individual in high crime area held insufficient to justify investigatory stop); Gipson v. State, 537 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (bare suspicion of criminal activity is insufficient to justify investigatory stop). Abraham v. State, 532 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); McCloud v. State, 491 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). See also Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Further, the cigarette packages found in Aguila’s car, as fruit of the illegal stop, should have bee…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Stevens, 354 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Butterworth v. State, 522 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)