ALAN ZACHARY WULFF, 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.
Alan Wulff, a passenger in a vehicle stopped by police, appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress contraband evidence. The court held that a passenger has standing to challenge the lawfulness of the initial vehicle stop because the stop constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure of the passenger's person.
A passenger in a vehicle has standing to challenge the lawfulness of the vehicle's initial stop because the stop constitutes a seizure of the passenger's person under the Fourth Amendment. The trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress without a hearing based solely on the appellant's status as a passenger.
[1] A passenger in a vehicle has standing to challenge the lawfulness of the initial stop of that vehicle.
[2] A passenger's standing to challenge the initial stop of a vehicle is distinct from standing to challenge the admissibility of evidence obtained from a search of the vehic…
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“the detention of his person in the stop of the car by police constituted a "seizure" within the meaning of the fourth amendment”
Establishes that a passenger is seized during a vehicle stop, providing the basis for standing to challenge the stop
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice officers conducted surveillance of a house suspected of illegal drug activity. They observed a man enter the house but did not see him or Wulff…
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 Fourth Amendment Seizure cases and more on FLexlaw
DANAHY, Judge.
The issue in this appeal is whether a passenger in a car in which contraband is found has standing to challenge the initial stop of the car. The trial court, upon reading in the appellant’s motion to suppress that the appellant was a passenger in the car stopped by police, denied the motion without a hearing, holding that the appellant lacked standing. The appellant then pled nolo contendere reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion. The parties stipulated that the denial of the motion was dispositive. We hold that the appellant has standing to contest the stop and that the trial court erred by not affording the appellant a hearing.
The facts alleged in this case, taken from the appellant’s motion to suppress, are summarized as follows: Police officers had a house under surveillance for suspected illegal drug activity. The surveilling officers saw a man enter the house, but they did not see this man or the appellant leave it. Later, the police stopped a car driven by a man wearing a shirt similar in color to the one worn by the man seen entering the house. The appellant was a passenger in the car. A subsequent search of the car revealed contraband drugs which the appellant sought to have suppressed as evidence.
In this appeal we do not reach the question whether a passenger has standing to challenge the admissibility of evidence obtained during the search of the car. Cf. State v. Bartz, 431 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (a passenger has .the burden to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy in the car). The appellant argues only that he should have been allowed to present evidence on the narrower threshold question whether the stop of the vehicle in which he was a passenger was lawful. He is correct, of course, that the detention of his person in the stop of the car by police constituted a “seizure” within the meaning of the fourth amendment. State v. Jones, 483 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1986). It follows then that he has standing to object to the initial stop of the vehicle in which he was a pas senger, and he should have been heard on his claim that the stop of the vehicle was done without a founded suspicion of illegal activity. State v. Delaney, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
CAMPBELL, C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Harol Castillo v. State, 536 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…hich the deputy decided that there was no fictitious driver’s license, there must be deemed to have been a continued, illegal detention which was the equivalent of an illegal stop of the car which led to the discovery of the bag. See Wulff v. State, 533 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); State v. Delaney, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (a passenger in an illegally stopped car, the search of which produced evidence used against the passenger in a criminal prosecution, is entitled to move to suppress the evidenc…
-
Ulysses R. Williams v. State, 640 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…0 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (where there was no exploitation of prior illegality, recovery of contraband was not tainted by illegality of defendant’s arrest). We also note that although Williams had standing to contest the stop of the car, Wulff v. State, 533 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), approved, Nelson v. State, 578 So. 2d 694 (Fla.1991), he had no right to complain of its search since he was a mere passenger, State v. Deen, 625 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), and he disavowed any possessory interest in the ite…
-
Nelson v. State, 578 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1991)…Nelson v. State, 546 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), based on conflict with State v. Scott, 481 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 492 So. 2d 1335 (Fla.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 931, 107 S.Ct. 402, 93 L.Ed.2d 355 (1986), and Wulff v. State, 533 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. Vincent Nelson was stopped on April 1, 1987, as he was driving a car out of the driveway of a residence onto the street. A police officer effectu…1 / 2
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
- State v. R.A., 483 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1986)
- State v. Bartz, 431 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Campbell v. State, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- State v. Delaney, 517 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)