THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JUAN REYES AND MIGUEL SOTO, APPELLEES
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 appealed a trial court's suppression of a firearm discovered during a vehicle stop, arguing the officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct the stop based on a BOLO (Be On the Look Out) alert matching a victim's description of suspects who had brandished weapons. The appellate court reversed the suppression order, holding that the officers' stop was justified by founded suspicion.
The Court held that the officers had reasonable and founded suspicion to conduct the investigatory stop because the vehicle, its occupants, time, and location were consistent with the BOLO description based on reliable victim information. Therefore, the suppression order was reversed.
[1] An investigatory stop is justified when officers have a "founded suspicion" of wrongdoing, based on the totality of the circumstances including the source and reliability…
[2] Information from a citizen reporting a crime, when relayed through a BOLO, can provide the necessary founded suspicion for an investigatory stop.
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“there was a "rational basis for the conclusion that those who were riding in the vehicle and those described in the BOLO were [three] and the same."”
Establishes the standard for whether officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct the stop based on matching the BOLO description
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA citizen reported to a Homestead police officer that three males in a dark sedan had driven by him, leaned out windows, yelled, and brandished baseba…
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 Founded Suspicion cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
A citizen reported to a Homestead police officer that, shortly before, three males had driven by him in a dark sedan, leaned out the windows, yelled, brandished baseball bats and a gun at him, and then headed north. The officer put out a BOLO with this information. Almost immediately afterward, another Homestead officer reported that, in response, she had stopped a similar group of men in a similar vehicle three or four blocks north of the scene of the incident. In the ensuing examination of the vehicle, the propriety of which is not disputed, the officers discovered an allegedly concealed firearm. In the order now under review, the trial judge suppressed the gun on the sole ground that the initial stop was not based on a “founded suspicion” of wrongdoing and was therefore unjustified.
We disagree.
In the light of (a) the source and presumed reliability of the information provided by the victim and contained in the BOLO, Lachs v. State, 366 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), and the consistency of the circumstances of the stop with (b) the description of the car and its occupants and (c) the time and place of the offense, it is clear that there was a “rational basis for the conclusion that those who were riding in the vehicle and those described in the BOLO were [three] and the same.” State v. Delgado, 402 So. 2d 41, 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
In our view, therefore, the officers acted upon the “reasonable” or “founded suspicion” constitutionally required to support the investigatory stop involved here. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 30, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1884, 20 L.Ed.2d 889, 911 (1968); Hunter v. State, 660 So. 2d 244 (Fla.1995), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 946, 133 L.Ed.2d 871 (1996); Franklin v. State, 374 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 388 So. 2d 1113 (Fla.1980); Lachs, 366 So. 2d at 1223; see Hetland v. State, 387 So. 2d 963 (Fla.1980).
Therefore, the order of suppression is
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Clark, 721 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…tances, the stop was more than amply supported by a reasonable suspicion. See Blanco v. State, 452 So. 2d 520, 522-23 (Fla.1984); State v. Gonzalez, 682 So. 2d 1168, 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), review denied, 689 So. 2d 1069 (Fla.1997); State v. Reyes, 680 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Persaud v. State, 659 So. 2d 1191, 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); State v. Russell, 659 So. 2d 465, 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); State v. Stevens, 354 So. 2d 1244, 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) § 901.151, Fla.Stat. .(1997); see also Hunter v. St…1 / 2
-
Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Suann Ivey, 73 So. 3d 877 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…eve that a stop was appropriate. More importantly, for purposes of this case, a reasonable suspicion can be based solely on information provided by an ordinary citizen. See State v. Evans, 692 So. 2d 216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). See also State v. Reyes, 680 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). In the present case the tips provided by Mr. Mayback and Mr. Chiaro were sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion. Probable cause and reasonable suspicion are two different standards. While the officers needed probable cause…
-
State v. Vance, 692 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…LO described suspects as several black males, possibly black females in vehicle, and officer in immediate area of crime at 4:30 a.m. saw such a vehicle within a minute, followed it, and observed occupants look nervously back at him); State v. Reyes, 680 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (“there was a ‘rationale basis for the conclusion that those who were riding [*272] in the vehicle and those described in the BOLO were [three] and the same’ ”); State v. Setzler, 667 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (“the BOLO coup…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968)
- Hunter v. State, 660 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 1995)
- Hetland v. State, 387 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1980)
- Franklin v. State, 374 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Black v. State, 366 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Lachs v. State, 366 So. 2d 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- MacKey v. State, 402 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)