STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
ED HOWARD, JR., 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 State appeals the suppression of contraband found during a warrantless search of a vehicle after the driver's arrest for a probation violation. The court affirms the suppression, holding that the search was not a valid search incident to arrest because the vehicle was already secured and locked before the arrest was effectuated.
The search was not a valid search incident to arrest because appellee had already exited and locked his vehicle before the arrest was effectuated, and there was no valid need or reason to search the vehicle as an incident to the arrest.
[1] A warrantless search of a vehicle is not permissible as a search incident to a valid arrest when the arrestee has exited the vehicle, locked it, and is detained until the…
[2] A police officer's suspicion aroused by a suspect's actions, such as returning an item to a locked vehicle, does not, by itself, establish probable cause for a warrantles…
Previewing 2 of 3 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 search of appellee's vehicle was not a search incident to a valid arrest. Appellee had exited his vehicle and locked it, and was detained until the validity of the outstanding arrest warrant was verified and then arrested.”
The court's core holding that the search cannot be justified as a search incident to arrest because the vehicle was secured before the arrest.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA police officer, aware of an outstanding warrant for appellee's arrest on a probation violation, followed appellee's vehicle to a convenience store. …
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 Search Incident To Lawful Arrest cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
A police officer, knowing of an outstanding warrant for the arrest of appellee for a probation violation, commenced following appellee, who was driving a car. Appellee turned into a convenience store, got out of his car with a pouch in his hand, saw the officer, then put the pouch back into the car and locked it and put the key in his pocket. The police officer approached appellee and advised him of the warrant for his arrest, called and verified the outstanding warrant, and then arrested him. After appellee was arrested, appellee’s brother arrived at the scene in another vehicle. Appellee told his brother to get appellee’s keys from appellee’s pocket and told his brother, “Don’t let them search my car.” The brother tried to get the keys from appellee’s pocket but the officer got there first and ordered the brother “to stand back.” The officer took the keys from appellee and searched the vehicle, finding contraband. The trial court suppressed the contraband evidence and the State appeals. We affirm.
We agree with the trial court that the search of appellee’s vehicle 'was not a search incident to a valid arrest. Appellee had exited his vehicle and locked it, and was detained until the validity of the outstanding arrest warrant was verified and then arrested. Of course, the officer’s suspicions were aroused when appellee put his pouch back in his car, locked it and tried to prevent his car from being searched. However, the officer did not have probable cause for a warrantless search of the car. There was no valid need or reason to search appellee’s vehicle as an incident to his valid arrest. See State v. Bennett, 516 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), rev. denied, 528 So. 2d 1183 (Fla.1988).
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 761 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 1999)…HARDING, C.J. We have for review State v. Thomas, 711 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), which expressly and directly conflicts with the opinion in State v. Howard, 538 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution. For the reasons expressed below, we quash the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal in Thomas. The facts of Thomas are as follow…1 / 2
-
State v. Thomas, 711 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…of the baggies tested positive for methamphetamine. Five minutes elapsed between the time that Thomas exited his car until Maney searched the car. [*1243] Following a hearing, the trial court granted the motion to suppress based on State v. Howard, 538 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). The trial court concluded that where an individual has exited a vehicle and subsequently is arrested on an outstanding warrant, a search of the vehicle is unlawful. We conclude that this finding was error. The law is well settl…1 / 2
-
Tara Union v. State, 660 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…ate, 603 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (arrest of defendant for urinating in street behind car did not justify warrantless search of car’s interior in absence of evidence that defendant was recent occupant of car at time of arrest); State v. Howard, 538 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (where arrestee had exited and locked car before he was approached by officer and then arrested, court held search of ear was not incident to arrest). The state also argues that the officers had probable cause to believe that th…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Bennett, 516 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)