STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
MARVIN THOMAS, 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 reversed the suppression of cocaine found after the defendant abandoned it while fleeing from deputies in a high-crime area, holding that the defendant cannot claim a Fourth Amendment violation when contraband is abandoned prior to any detention or intrusive police action.
A defendant cannot claim a Fourth Amendment violation when contraband is abandoned prior to any detention or other affirmatively intrusive police act.
[1] Contraband abandoned by a defendant prior to any police detention or affirmatively intrusive act does not implicate Fourth Amendment protections.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTwo deputies patrolling a high drug area in Lee County observed three or four subjects scatter at the approach of their marked vehicle. Marvin Thomas …
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 Abandonment Of Contraband cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The state appeals an order suppressing a plastic bag of cocaine. We reverse.
Two deputies were patrolling a “high drug area” of Lee County in a marked vehicle. They turned onto Bessie Court, which is described as a cul-de-sac. Three or four subjects, including appellee Marvin Thomas, scattered at the approach of the patrol car. Thomas ran around and behind a nearby house, which the deputies knew was not his residence. One of the deputies followed on foot and observed Thomas kneeling and reaching underneath the house. Thomas then ran twenty to thirty feet away and stood beneath a tree looking upward. At this juncture he was arrested for loitering. Thomas told the arresting officer that he had gone into the yard to look for a mango; he denied having been near the house. The second deputy was directed to the spot where Thomas had been kneeling, and he recovered the bagful of cocaine.
The trial court suppressed the evidence based on his belief that the deputies had no right to “chase them down and find out why they ran.” It is true that flight from police, even in a so-called “high crime area,” may not provide the founded suspicion necessary for an investigatory detention. Daniels v. State, 543 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). However, in the present case Thomas appears to have abandoned the contraband prior to any detention or other affirmatively intrusive act by the deputies. Thus he cannot claim a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. State v. Davis, 415 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
Reversed.
RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Anderson v. State, 576 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…s court suppressed evidence which had been thrown out of a car after an illegal stop, ruling that “the fruits of the improper exercise of police power should have been suppressed.” Stanley, 327 So. 2d at 245. Further, in the case of State v. Thomas, 559 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), this court reversed an order granting suppression, finding that the defendant had abandoned the contraband prior to any detention or other intrusive act. These cases from the second district support the argument that an abandonme…
-
Smith v. State, 592 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…ed a sentence of four years. However, in a previous 3.850 motion Smith asserted that his plea had been induced by the promise of a sentence of only two and one-half years. The summary denial of that motion was reversed by this court. Smith v. State, 559 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). On remand the trial court vacated the judgment and sentence, allegedly without Smith’s request or consent.1 Smith proceeded to trial, was convicted, and received a ten year sentence. Smith raises three issues in his present moti…
-
Smith v. State, 561 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…er an improper stop. There was no proper basis to stop defendant for loitering, see B.A.A. v. State, 356 So. 2d 304, 306 (Fla.1978), or for defendant in a high crime area walking away from an officer with a hand in his pocket, see State v. Thomas, 559 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Reversed and remanded with the direction to enter a judgment of acquittal on the foregoing charges. SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and FRANK, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- In re D.M., 543 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Rifkin, 415 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- State v. Davis, 415 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)