RALPH WALKER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1990-09-05
No. 88-3091
ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and KAHN, MARTIN D., Associate Judge, concur.
567 So. 2d 15 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

•Reversed and remanded for a new trial. We reject appellant’s claims of error as to the denial of his motion to suppress and motion for directed verdict. However, we agree with appellant that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of complaints by unspecified neighbors of suspected drug activity at appellant’s residence and police surveillance prior to the search of his home, as well as discussion about and admission of the actual search warrant that lead to the charges against appellant for possession of drugs in his home. See Johnson v. State, 559 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Adams v. State, 559 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); and Cabral v. State, 550 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and KAHN, MARTIN D., Associate Judge, concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Augustine Antonio Ledo v. State, 587 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
    …the police to be where they were when the cocaine was discovered was not at issue at the time of trial. That issue had already been resolved at a previous motion to suppress hearing. See Heuring v. State, 513 So. 2d 122 (Fla.1987); Walker v. State, 567 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Cf. Wells v. State, 477 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (no “probable cause exception” to the hearsay rule). Based on the foregoing, the defendant’s conviction is reversed and the cause is remanded for a new trial.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw