I.T., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plain View Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We conclude that, in the totality of the surrounding circumstances, the officer’s plain view observation of a plastic baggy of a type uniquely used for narcotics sticking out of the respondent’s pocket provided probable cause for his arrest and subsequent search. P.L.R. v. State, 455 So. 2d 363 (Fla.1984); Cross v. State, 560 So. 2d 228 (Fla.1990); Council v. State, 442 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Hence, the motion to suppress the drugs found in the bag was properly denied and the adjudication on appeal in case number 92-1075 is therefore affirmed.
The imposition, on a separate charge, of community control without sanctions, which is challenged by the state in case number 92-947, was admittedly not entered in conformance with sections 39.052; 39.-054, Florida Statutes (1991), and is therefore vacated.
Affirmed, vacated.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. F.G., 630 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…try of the disposition orders does not render the dispositions “illegal” for purposes of a State appeal under subparagraph 39.-069(l)(b)(5), Florida Statutes (1991). The State contends that this court reached a contrary conclusion in I.T. v. State, 614 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). We disagree. In I.T. the State specifically challenged the disposition as being illegal.5 There, the trial court had placed an adjudicated delinquent in community control without including a penalty component in the disposition o…
-
State v. K.V., 821 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…h both their persons and the vehicle. Moreover, after the stop of the occupants, the deputy’s plain view observation of the baggie of marijuana wedged between the car seats provided additional probable cause to conduct the search. See I.T. v. State, 614 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (finding probable cause to search juvenile suspect after officer observed a plastic baggie protruding from his pocket). [*1129] The order granting appellee’s motion to suppress is reversed and the case is remanded for further proc…
-
Alpha McNEIL v. State, 746 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…789, 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (holding that a bare suspicion that a defendant may be trying to conceal contraband in their mouth is insufficient to justify a search); see also Cummo v. State, 581 So. 2d 967, 968 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); cf. I.T. v. State, 614 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (holding that officer’s plain view observation of plastic baggie used for narcotics sticking out of defendant’s pocket provided legal basis for seizure and search). The motion to suppress was dispos-itive of the cocaine possessio…
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
- P.L.R. v. State, 455 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1984)
- Cross v. State, 560 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 1990)
- Joe Council v. State, 442 So. 2d 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)