THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID LEE WILLIAMS, 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.
Florida appeals a suppression order granted to defendant Williams after police stopped him wheeling a lawn mower through a residential neighborhood at 11 p.m. The appellate court reverses, holding that the officer had reasonable, articulable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop under Florida law.
The appellate court held that the officer was justified in stopping the defendant for investigatory purposes under Florida Statute § 901.151(2), as the officer possessed the requisite reasonable, articulable suspicion that the defendant either committed, was committing, or was about to commit a criminal offense. The trial court erred in suppressing the evidence.
[1] An investigatory stop is lawful when the detaining officer possesses a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the individual has committed, is committing, or is about to…
[2] A founded suspicion for an investigatory stop may exist when an individual is observed engaging in unusual activity late at night, such as wheeling a lawn mower through a…
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“The officer had a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the defendant either committed, was committing or was about to commit a criminal offense.”
Establishes the standard for justifying an investigatory stop under Florida law and the court's finding that this standard was met.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOfficer LaRosa stopped Williams while he was wheeling a lawn mower through a residential neighborhood at approximately 11 p.m., finding this activity …
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 Unoccupied Dwelling cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The state appeals from an order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress. We reverse and remand.
Officer Horacio LaRosa stopped the defendant, David Lee Williams, while he was wheeling a lawn mower through a residential neighborhood at about 11:00 p.m. The officer testified that he stopped the defendant because this was an unusual activity. The defendant told the officer that he had just finished a job.
However, the lawn mower was cold to the touch and clean of grass. The defendant could not remember the address or name of the person for which he had done the job. After unsuccessfully driving around the neighborhood looking for the house, the officer stopped the ear, read the defendant his Miranda rights and asked him if he had stolen the lawn mower. The defendant admitted that he had stolen the lawn mower and directed the officer to the house from where it was taken. After the owner identified the lawn mower, the defendant was arrested and charged with burglary of an unoccupied dwelling and petit theft. The defendant moved to suppress the lawn mower seized by the police officer.
The trial court granted the defendant’s motion. The state appealed.
The state contends that the trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence where such evidence was obtained pursuant to a lawful investigatory detention in which the police officer possessed the requisite founded suspicion for such a stop.
We agree. The officer had a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the defendant either committed, was committing or was about to commit a criminal offense.
Section 901.151(2), Fla.Stat. (1991).
We hold that, under the circumstances, the officer was justified in stopping the defendant for investigatory purposes. State v. Abraham, 625 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (Officer had founded suspicion to stop defendant where he observed defendant in downtown shopping section late at night running with large shopping bags.); State v. Black, 617 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (Officer had probable cause to stop defendant where he was pushing shopping cart containing six rolls of new roofing paper along street at 6:50 a.m.); State v. Jenkins, 566 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (Officer had founded suspicion to stop defendant where he was riding bicycle in early morning hours with a box overflowing with goods.); compare Hill v. State, 561 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (Officers did not have founded suspicion to stop defendant where defendant was simply standing in roadway in high crime area at 5:00 a.m.); Levin v. State, 449 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (Officer did not have founded suspicion to stop defendant where defendant was walking toward the water along public street at 3:00 a.m. in a residential area carrying a fishing pole.).
Accordingly, we reverse the order suppressing evidence.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Scott, 641 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…with personal belongings balanced on the handlebars during the early afternoon hours through a residential neighborhood does not establish that defendant engaged in unusual or suspicious activity sufficient to justify a stop. Cf. State v. Williams, 627 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (wheeling a lawn mower through a residential neighborhood at 11:00 P.M. gives rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity); State v. Jenkins, 566 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (defendant riding bicycle through business sec…
-
State v. Mitchell, 722 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…them. See State v. Abraham, 625 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)(officer had founded suspicion to stop defendant in downtown shopping section late at night running with large shopping bags), review denied, 639 So. 2d 975 (Fla.1994); State v. Williams, 627 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)(officer had reasonable, articulable suspicion to stop defendant wheeling lawn mower through residential neighborhood at 11:00 p.m.); State v. Black, 617 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)(officer had probable cause to stop [*909] defen…
-
Freeman v. State, 909 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…Officer Taylor observed two individuals loaded down with lawn equipment and one too many bicycles riding around a commercial neighborhood in the wee hours of the morning, a circumstance not “usual for law-abiding individuals.” See State v. Williams, 627 So. 2d 97, 98 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (wheeling a lawn mower through a residential neighborhood at 11:00 P.M. gives rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity); State v. Jenkins, 566 So. 2d 926, 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (riding bicycle through business sect…
Authorities Cited
- Levin v. State, 449 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- State v. Jenkins, 566 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- State v. Black, 617 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Brodsky v. Knight-Ridder, Inc., 561 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Hill v. State, 561 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- State v. Abraham, 625 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)