STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CARY ARNOLD, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Constructive Possession cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Although we deny appellee’s motion for rehearing, we substitute this opinion for the opinion issued January 31, 1990:
Upon the motion for rehearing and motion for rehearing en banc filed by appellee, this court voted to consider the issue en banc. We have now reviewed the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in California v. Hodari, — U.S.-, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991), which we find dispositive.
Accordingly, the court voted to dis-en banc. Appellee’s motion for rehearing is denied, the order of the trial court suppressing the evidence is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
DELL and POLEN, JJ., concur. GARRETT, J., concurs specially with opinion.
GARRETT, Judge,
concurs specially.
Simply put, appellee chose to flee from the orchard with the fruit before the tree became poisonous. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963).
While conducting a drug sweep in a residential area known for crack cocaine dealing, police officers approached a group of people that included appellee. The group was standing in front of an apartment complex and did not appear to be involved in any illegal activity. At the sight of the approaching officers, the group scattered. One of the officers began chasing appellee and another assisted in the chase. Deputy Trawinski testified his usual procedure at that point would be to yell, “Sheriff’s Department. Stop.” During the chase, Deputy Barnhouse saw appellee throw a paper bag onto an apartment roof. When one of the officers retrieved the bag, he found it contained individually wrapped cocaine base rocks. The officers arrested appellee and found money on his person.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (26 total)
-
Karie Lynn Gibbs v. Gibbs, 686 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)…(Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (citing to Zediker and stating petitioner must prove substantial material change in circumstances occurred and change of custody would promote welfare of children), review denied, 542 So. 2d 1333 (Fla.1989). In Jablon v. Jablon, 579 So. 2d 902, 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), this court relied on Stricklin in observing: [*644] As our sister courts have pointed out, there is an ‘extraordinary’ burden on the movant to prove (1) that a substantial and material change of circumstances has occurred si…
-
Cooper v. Gress, 854 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…and discretion in a modification proceeding are more restricted than at the time of the initial custody determination.” Newsom v. Newsom, 759 So. 2d 718, 719 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Young v. Young, 732 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Jablon v. Jablon, 579 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Zediker v. Zediker, 444 So. 2d 1034, 1036 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (describing movant’s “extraordinary burden” to satisfy “substantial change in circumstances” and “children’s best interests” tests to justify modification). In seeking…
-
Bartolotta v. Bartolotta, 687 So. 2d 1385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…n, as relatively minor mistakes usually associated with parenting, as found here, are not considered substantial and material changes in circumstance. Bridges v. Bridges, 625 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Stern, 616 So. 2d at 146; Jablon v. Jablon, 579 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). In sum, the facial inadequacy of the Father’s petition and the legal insufficiency of the trial court’s order, which was not confined to the Father’s allegations, are apparent.1 Modifying custody under these circumstances is an…
Previewing 3 of 26 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wong SUN v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1963)
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (U.S. 1991)