STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
ANNIE HESTER, RESPONDENT
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 quashed a district court decision that suppressed evidence found in a paper bag during a vehicle search, finding that consent to search the vehicle extended to the bag.
Consent to search a vehicle extends to containers within it, such as a folded paper bag, if they are not locked or sealed, based on conformity with U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
[1] Consent to search a vehicle extends to containers within the vehicle that are neither locked nor sealed, absent specific limitations on the scope of consent.
[2] Florida courts must construe Fourth Amendment issues in conformity with rulings of the United States Supreme Court.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA law enforcement officer lawfully stopped a vehicle and obtained the driver's consent to search. The officer then opened a brown paper bag found with…
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 Florida Constitution Article I, Section 23 (Right Of Privacy) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We review Hester v. State, 563 So. 2d 191, 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), in which the district court of appeal certified the following question as one of great public importance:
IF A MOTOR VEHICLE IS LAWFULLY STOPPED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND THE DRIVER CONSENTS TO THE OFFICER SEARCHING THE VEHICLE, DOES THE CONSENT GIVEN EXTEND TO THE SEARCH OF A BROWN PAPER BAG FOLDED-OVER, WITHIN THE VEHICLE, WHICH IS NEITHER LOCKED NOR SEALED?
We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.
A similar question was certified to this Court in State v. Jimeno, 550 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We originally responded to the question in the negative. State v. Jimeno, 564 So. 2d 1083 (Fla.1990), cert. granted, 498 U.S. 997, 111 S.Ct. 554, 112 L.Ed.2d 561 (1990). However, our deci sion was reversed by the United States Supreme Court. Florida v. Jimeno, — U.S.-, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991). Upon remand, this Court quashed the decision of the district court of appeal that had affirmed the order suppressing the evidence, stating:
Jimeno now argues that the opening of the paper bag violated his right to privacy pursuant to article I, section 23 of the Florida Constitution. We reject this argument because of article I, section 12 of the Florida Constitution, which requires this Court to construe Fourth Amendment issues in conformity with rulings of the United States Supreme Court. As explained in State v. Hume, 512 So. 2d 185 (Fla.1987), our right of privacy provision, article I, section 23, does not modify the applicability of article I, section 12, particularly since section 23 was adopted prior to the present section 12.
State v. Jimeno, 588 So. 2d 233, 233 (Fla.1991).
It is evident that our disposition of Jime-no controls the instant case. Therefore, we quash the decision below and remand with directions to reinstate Hester’s conviction for trafficking in cocaine.
It is so ordered.
overton, McDonald, shaw, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ„ concur. BARKETT, C.J., concurs in result only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rush Limbaugh v. State, 887 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…privacy provision under article I, section 23, of the Florida Constitution prohibited the introduction of [defendant’s conversation in his home with an undercover police officer].” Madsen v. State, 521 So. 2d 110, 110 (Fla.1988). In State v. Hester, 618 So. 2d 1365 (Fla.1993), the court restated that “our right of privacy provision, article I, section 23, does not modify the applicability of article I, section 12, particularly since section 23 was adopted prior to the present section 12.” 618 So. 2d at 1366; s…1 / 2
-
Corlie Causey v. State, 623 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…contents of a pill bottle found in the course of a consent search of Appellant’s ear. The pill bottle was found inside an open container inside the car. See e.g., Florida v. Jimeno, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991); State v. Hester, 618 So. 2d 1365 (Fla.1993); U.S. v. Nicholson, 983 F. 2d 983 (10th Cir.1993); U.S. v. Springs, 936 F. 2d 1330 (D.C.Cir.1991). Appellant also contends that reversal is mandated because the trial court did not advise Appellant of all of his rights before the court…
-
Brown v. State, 734 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991); State v. Hester, 618 So. 2d 1365 (Fla.1993); Oliver v. State, 642 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). GUNTHER, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.…
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
- Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (U.S. 1991)
- State v. Hume, 512 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1987)
- State v. Jimeno, 550 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- State v. Jimeno, 564 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 1990)
- State v. Jimeno, 588 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 1991)
- Delgadillo v. Texas, 498 U.S. 997 (U.S. 1990)
- Air Line Pilots Assn. v. O'Neill, 498 U.S. 997 (U.S. 1990)
- Hester v. State, 563 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)