JAMES BLUE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
James Blue appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence of firearms found during a traffic stop. The court reversed, holding that the 45-minute detention was unconstitutionally prolonged because the officer lacked founded suspicion to justify extending the stop beyond issuance of a traffic citation.
The initial stop was valid, but the lengthy detention was illegal because the officer lacked a founded suspicion of criminal activity. The furtive movements observed (the driver leaning forward and Blue adjusting his pants) do not rise to the level of founded suspicion necessary to justify extending detention beyond the time needed to issue a traffic citation.
[1] A police officer's observation of needle marks on a passenger's arm does not, standing alone, establish a founded suspicion to detain the driver of a vehicle.
[2] Evidence obtained as a result of an illegal police stop or detention is subject to suppression under the Fourth Amendment.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“If the officer's suspicion is not well-founded, a "proper stop cannot enlarge the length of detention for the stop should be no longer than it takes to write out the traffic citation."”
Establishes the fundamental rule that traffic stops must be brief unless supported by founded suspicion of criminal activity.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDetective Unwin stopped a vehicle for a broken tail light covered with red cloth or tape. As Unwin obtained the driver's license, Blue exited the vehi…
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 Furtive Movements cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Acting Chief Judge.
James Blue appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress on the ground that the lengthy detention following his stop was not justified by founded suspicion. We reverse.
Blue was a passenger in a car observed by Detective Unwin of the Charlotte County Sheriff’s Department. Unwin noted that red cloth or tape covered a broken tail light, and he stopped the vehicle. At the suppression hearing Unwin testified that the driver leaned forward as if trying to conceal something. As Unwin was obtaining the driver’s license and registration, Blue exited the vehicle, tying his sweat pants which he wore over shorts. Unwin thought Blue might be trying to conceal something. He stated that he was concerned for his safety, and he requested a canine unit because he suspected that Blue and the driver might have drugs.
The stop took place at approximately 9:10 in the evening. The driver would not consent to a search of the car, and the canine unit arrived at about 10:00. The dog sniffed the vehicle but did not alert to the presence of drugs. At that point, forty-five minutes after the initial stop and after the canine sniff was negative, Unwin took his flashlight and shined it into the car. Through the windshield he could see a revolver on the floorboard of the passenger’s side. He opened the door and retrieved the gun, and then searched the interior, where he found a shotgun wrapped in a jacket on the floor in the back. The officer also found gloves and masks in the front seat.
Blue and the driver were arrested for carrying a concealed firearm. At some point Unwin issued the driver a citation for faulty vehicle equipment.
The issue in this case is whether the lengthy detention was legal. Although the initial stop was valid, Unwin did not articulate any reason for the extensive detention. In order to conduct an investigatory stop, an officer must have a founded suspicion that criminal activity exists. Ke-hoe v. State, 521 So. 2d 1094 (Fla.1988). If, after a valid stop, an officer possesses a reasonable, as opposed to a mere or bare, suspicion that criminal activity is afoot, he can validly detain the defendant. Cress-well v. State, 564 So. 2d 480 (Fla.1990). If the officer’s suspicion is not well-founded, a “proper stop cannot enlarge the length of detention for the stop should'be no longer than it takes to write out the traffic citation.” State v. Anderson, 479 So. 2d 816, 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). See also L.W. v. State, 538 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
In this case the officer saw the driver make a furtive movement. Blue also made a “hiding” motion as he adjusted his pants. Such is the extent of Unwin’s observations. The behavior does not give rise to a founded suspicion of criminal activity. Although Unwin stated that he feared for his safety, his articulation of the facts does not reveal a basis for that concern. If anything, his testimony revealed his prime thought— Blue and his companion might be carrying illegal drugs. At any rate, his fear for his safety should have dissipated during the 45-minute detention.
This case is similar to our recent case of Joseph v. State, 588 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in which we concluded:
We have carefully considered all that [the officer] observed and can find no articulable evidence of criminal wrongdoing which can justify the appellant’s detention beyond the issuance of traffic citations.
Accordingly, the order denying Blue’s motion to suppress is reversed; and the judgment and sentence entered against him are set aside. This case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
THREADGILL and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Beasley v. State, 604 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…conducted only where the officer has probable cause to believe the person is armed with a dangerous weapon.” Id. The officer here did not articulate any reason for believing that Beasley was armed with a dangerous weap [*873] on. See Blue v. State, 592 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Because the state and appellant have stipulated that the motion to suppress is dispositive, this case is reversed and remanded to the trial court for the discharge of appellant. Reversed and remanded with directions. THREADGIL…
-
Lakethan Warren Bozeman v. State, 603 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…ce officer accomplishes the purpose of a traffic stop. Cresswell v. State, 564 So. 2d 480 (Fla.1990). Here, once Zuercher determined that the appellant was fit to drive, his continued detention and warrantless search were illegal. See Blue v. State, 592 So. 2d 1263 (Fla.2d DCA 1992) (extensive detention after initial valid stop illegal because observations did not give rise to founded suspicion when driver made furtive movement and defendant made “hiding” motion as he adjusted his pants); Dunbar v. State, 592…
-
State v. Brooks, 662 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)…d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Powell v. State, 649 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Rouse v. State, 643 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Sims v. State, 622 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Bozeman v. State, 603 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Blue v. State, 592 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Dunbar v. State, 592 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); State v. Anderson, 479 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). .See State v. Orozco, 607 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), rev. denied, 614 So. 2d 503 (Fla.1993); Rogers v. State, 586 So…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Kehoe v. State, 521 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 1988)
- Cresswell v. State, 564 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1990)
- Racino v. State, 479 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Sanon v. Joseph, 588 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Brown v. State, 538 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)