STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CHRISTOPHER MILMOE, 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.
Florida appealed the suppression of evidence seized from a vehicle parked in an apartment complex during execution of a drug warrant. The court reversed, holding that an officer lawfully observed drug paraphernalia in plain view during the warranted search of the curtilage and had probable cause to seize the items.
The officer lawfully positioned himself in the apartment complex parking lot as part of the curtilage included in the search warrant and had authority to be there. The officer had probable cause to seize the items based on plain view observations, as the combination of the hand-rolled cigarette, rolling papers, and scissors would lead a trained drug investigator to reasonably believe they constituted marijuana and drug paraphernalia.
[1] A search warrant for an apartment and its curtilage authorizes police to be present in the curtilage, including an apartment complex parking lot.
[2] Police officers have the right to position themselves in any public area where no reasonable expectation of privacy is recognized.
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 officer who searched the automobile had the authority to be on the parking lot. Such authority came from the warrant expressly including the curtilage as part of the search area.”
Establishes the officer's lawful authority to search the vehicle in the apartment complex parking lot
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice obtained a warrant to search an apartment and its curtilage for drug evidence. While executing the warrant, officers observed Milmoe enter the …
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 Drug Paraphernalia cases and more on FLexlaw
GARRETT, Judge.
Members of the Davie Police Department obtained a warrant to search an apartment and its curtilage for evidence of drug violations. The warrant did not specify the name of the occupant of the apartment.
While waiting to execute the warrant, the police observed the appellee drive up, legally park his automobile in the apartment complex parking lot, and enter the apartment described in the warrant. The police then entered the apartment and secured all the persons therein. One of the officers went outside to check the ownership of the parked car. It was dark; he used a flashlight to look through the windshield. The officer saw a partially smoked hand-rolled cigarette on the floorboard and a pair of scissors and cigarette rolling papers in an open ashtray. Believing the hand-rolled cigarette contained marijuana and the scissors and rolling papers were drug paraphernalia, the officer seized the items as contraband and arrested the appellee.
A motion to suppress the evidence seized was granted and the state appealed.
The officer who searched the automobile had the authority to be on the parking lot. Such authority came from the warrant expressly including the curtilage as part of the search area. The parking lot was part of the curtilage. Such authority also came from the officer’s right to position himself anywhere he chose on a public area where no reasonable expectation of privacy from his or any private citizen’s presence is recognized. No such expectation is recognized in an open apartment complex parking lot.
Even conceding there was no evidentiary link between the automobile and the apartment, Dunn v. State, 292 So. 2d 435, 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974), cert. dismissed, State v. Dunn, 296 So. 2d 47 (Fla.1974) the officer had sufficient probable cause to search based upon his plain view observations of the items in the automobile.
Reasonable people might disagree whether a hand-rolled cigarette and rolling papers by themselves would indicate criminal or innocent behavior to an officer. Captan v. State, 531 So. 2d 88, 91 n. 1 (Fla.1988) petition for cert, filed, December 9, 1988. However, the “additional factor” of the scissors (a surgical hemostat) leads one to conclude a trained officer experienced in drug investigations would reasonably believe the rolled-cigarette contained marijuana and the scissors, a “roach clip”, were used to hold a marijuana cigarette when it was being smoked. P.L.R. v. State, 455 So. 2d 363 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1220, 105 S.Ct. 1206, 84 L.Ed.2d 349 (1985).
The total circumstances of the officer’s observations did not take place in a vacuum, they took place during a drug investigation in a society where knowledge of drug usage methods is shamefully commonplace even to the ordinary citizen.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.
HERSEY, C.J., and DOWNEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Hughes, 562 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…e able to clearly see the crack cocaine on the floorboard of the vehicle, were entitled to lawfully seize the cocaine without a warrant. State v. Ashby, 245 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1971); State v. Coleman, 502 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); State v. Milmoe, 541 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); State v. Hall, 352 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); United States v. Lara, 517 F. 2d 209 (5th Cir.1975). 1 LaFave, Search and Seizure (2d ed.), § 2.2(b); 14 Fla.Jur.2d, Criminal Law, § 502. REVERSED. ERVIN, J., and THOMPSON, FO…
-
Sites v. State, 582 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…la. 5th DCA 1988); McCloud v. State, 491 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Lower v. State, 348 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Cf. State v. Warshan, 580 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); State v. Jacobs, 574 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); State v. Milmoe, 541 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). GLICKSTEIN, C.J., ANSTEAD, J., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- P.L.R. v. State, 455 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1984)
- Clark A. Caplan v. State, 531 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 1988)
- Bellman v. United States, 469 U.S. 1220 (U.S. 1985)
- P. L. R. v. Florida, 469 U.S. 1220 (U.S. 1985)
- Dunn v. State, 292 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
- State v. Dunn, 296 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1974)
- Al-Craft Indus., Inc. v. Oscar Valdes & the Indus. Relations Comm'n, 296 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1974)