STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
KATRINA NEELEY, APPELLEE
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
KATRINA NEELEY, APPELLEE
548 So. 2d 1165
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1989)
Caution
Cited by 3 cases
Topics
Automobile Exception To Warrant Requirement
Automobile Exception
Consent To Search
Warrant Requirement
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Automobile Exception To Warrant Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion of the Court
PARKER, Judge.
The state appeals a trial court’s order granting a motion to suppress cocaine seized from an automobile. We affirm and certify a question to the supreme court.
Katrina Neeley is a codefendant of Michael Abrams, whose case was decided this date by this court. See State v. Abrams, 548 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), for a review of the facts and legal issues involved in both cases.
We affirm the trial court but, as in Abrams, certify the following question of great public importance to the supreme court:
IF A MOTOR VEHICLE IS LAWFULLY STOPPED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE DRIVER CONSENTS TO THE OFFICER LOOKING INSIDE THE VEHICLE, DOES THE CONSENT GIVEN EXTEND TO THE SEARCH OF CLOSED CONTAINERS WITHIN THE VEHICLE WHICH ARE NEITHER LOCKED NOR SEALED?
Affirmed.
RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ridgewood Props., Inc. v. Dep't OF Cmty. Affairs, 562 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 1990)…GRIMES, Justice. Pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution, we review Ridgewood Properties, Inc. v. Department of Community Affairs, 548 So. 2d 1165, 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), in order to answer the following question that the district court certified as being of great public importance: Is it a violation of a party’s due process rights in an administrative hearing for the head of a department…
-
Johnie W. Wallace v. State, 557 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…hough not sealed or locked, cosmetic kit in the vehicle. This court has recently held on similar facts that a search of closed containers exceeds the scope of a general consent. State v. Abrams, 548 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) and State v. Neeley, 548 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). We therefore reverse the trial court’s order denying the suppression of the cocaine found in Appellant’s vehicle. As we did in Abrams and Neeley, we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: IF A MOTOR VEHICL…
-
Jacobs v. State, 733 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…certified the same question.1 See Wallace v. State, 557 So. 2d 212, 213-14 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (holding that the police exceeded the scope of consent to “look around” a vehicle by looking inside a ladies’ cosmetic kit found therein); State v. Neeley, 548 So. 2d 1165, 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (codefendant of Abrams). The supreme court has not answered the certified question. At the hearing on the motion to suppress, Jacobs argued that under Abrams, the deputies exceeded the scope of consent by opening closed con…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Abrams, 548 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)