MARY LAURETTE SANDERLEN, TERESA DENAULT, AND DENNIS DENAULT, APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Knock And Announce Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
FARMER, Judge.
We defer, as we must, to the trial judge's factual finding that, although the search warrant was defective because the affidavit lacked probable cause, the officers nevertheless had a good faith belief in the sufficiency of the warrant. We view the good faith inquiry as being both factual and legal in its essential nature and thus beyond our power to affect.
Although the trial judge’s order denying the motion to suppress is silent on the “knock and announce” argument, the hearing transcript reveals that he did actually consider the issue. He said:
The court finds that the officer testified that at the time of the knock by the Sheriff’s Department, Dennis DeNault, the officer saw him running in the house so they were justified in immediately knocking down the door and entering the house through the window. So there is no violation of the Knock and Announce Statute.
There is evidence in the record to support the judge’s finding.
AFFIRMED.
STONE, GARRETT and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. State, 804 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…4th DCA 1998); Jones v. State, 666 So. 2d 995, 998 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). It is also fundamental error to give an inaccurate and misleading instruction where the effect of that instruction is to negate a defendant’s only defense. See Sigler v. State, 590 So. 2d 18, 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Carter v. State, 469 So. 2d 194, 196 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1985). We agree that the jury instructions on the charged offenses are inaccurate and misleading and that the error is fundamental and thus reviewable. See Williams v. Stat…
-
Murray v. State, 937 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…other hand, it is clear that defense counsel did not expressly object to this instruction. Even so, we have previously deemed it fundamental error to instruct a jury in such a way as to define a legal defense out of existence. See Sigler v. State, 590 So. 2d 18, 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (holding that an unprotested jury instruction may be fundamental error when it is improper and has the effect of negating defendant’s only defense). Telling the jury that defendant had to prove the basis for self-defense beyo…
-
Chaeld v. State, 599 So. 2d 1362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…than [the kidnapping motives]” language because if the evidence shows [*1364] that the only purpose of the restraint was to commit or facilitate the commission of a felony, the defendant may be not guilty of false imprisonment); and Sigler v. State, 590 So. 2d 18, 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (same). The instruction the appellant requested derives from language approved by the supreme court in Faison for use in some kidnapping cases. Faison approved of the analysis in Harkins v. State, 380 So. 2d 524, 528 (Fla. 5…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence