STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
RALPH KAMINS, 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.
The court held that the traffic stop was legal because the driver violated a statute requiring turn signals, and the evidence found was admissible.
A police officer stopped a vehicle for failing to use a turn signal before making two left turns. During the stop, officers observed illegal items in …
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 Plain View Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State argues the trial court erred in finding that Kamins’ traffic stop was illegal and in suppressing the evidence obtained during the stop. We agree and reverse.
A police officer stopped Kamins’ vehicle after Kamins made two left turns without proper turn signals in violation of section 316.155(2), Florida Statutes (1991). During the traffic stop, the police officer observed marijuana, cocaine, and an open beer bottle in plain view. Kamins was arrested, and a subsequent search revealed additional cocaine and large sums of cash.
We do not agree with the trial court that section 316.155(2) must be read in conjunction with section 316.155(1) and that a signal of intention to turn right or left need only be given in the event another vehicle may be affected by the movement. The specific language and requirements of subsection (2) controls over the general provi sion of subsection (1). Adams v. Culver, 111 So. 2d 665 (Fla.1959).
Because the police officer observed a violation of section 316.155(2), the police officer acted in accordance with the law and made a valid stop. Andrews v. State, 540 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). The evidence was in plain view and, therefore, is admissible. Likewise, the evidence found during the subsequent search is admissible since the police officer had probable cause for a search. Id. Accordingly, the trial court’s order granting Kamins’ motion to suppress is reversed.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DELL, GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Riley, 638 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1994)…McDONALD, Senior Justice, concurring in result only. I believe the interpretation of section 316.-155 by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in State v. Kamins, 615 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied, 626 So. 2d 206 (Fla.1993), is correct. It is obvious, however, that [*509] the stop in this case was pretextual and the trial judge was therefore correct in suppressing the evidence obtained as a result of the stop. I…1 / 2
-
State v. Riley, 625 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…he last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning, except that such a signal by hand or arm need not be given continuously by a bicyclist if the hand is needed in the control or operation of the bicycle. The state, relying on State v. Kamins, 615 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), argues that the “specific” language of subsection (2) above prevails over the “general” language of subsection (1), thereby negating the reference to the effect of a turn on any other vehicle. We agree with the trial court and…1 / 2
-
State v. Ralf Kamins, 666 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…. In State v. Riley, 638 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1994), the Florida Supreme Court resolved conflict and disapproved a decision of this court holding that appellant Kamins was legally stopped by an officer when drugs were found in his car. State v. Kamins, 615 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), rev. denied, 626 So. 2d 206 (Fla.1993). The issue presented here is whether Riley should be applied retroactively to Kamins, pursuant to his motion for post-conviction relief. We conclude that Riley is not retroactive on collate…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Kerfert Butler Adams v. Culver, 111 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 1959)
- Andrews v. State, 540 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)