THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN LIVINGSTON DENNIS, 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 appealed the suppression of evidence obtained during the arrest of John Dennis for yelling a police warning. The court affirmed the suppression, holding that Dennis's arrest for obstruction of justice was illegal because there was no evidence he knew of or was connected to the drug deal and yelling a police warning alone cannot constitute obstruction of justice.
The arrest was illegal and the evidence was properly suppressed. Words alone, particularly yelling a police warning without connection to a known criminal activity, cannot support a charge of obstruction of justice, and there was no probable cause to arrest Dennis because he was not connected to the drug deal and there was no evidence his warning caused the target to escape.
[1] A search and seizure is unreasonable when it results from an illegal arrest lacking probable cause.
[2] Yelling a street term meaning police are in the area, without more, does not constitute obstruction of justice.
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“Words alone generally cannot support a charge of obstruction of justice”
Establishes the legal standard that verbal conduct must meet additional requirements to constitute obstruction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceUndercover officers were conducting a drug operation when they heard Dennis yell 'Ninety-nine,' a street term for police. Several people in the area f…
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 Lookout cases and more on FLexlaw
NESBITT, Judge.
Defendant, John Dennis, was charged by information with possession of cocaine and obstruction of justice. Dennis filed a motion to suppress the evidence, arguing it had been obtained through an unreasonable search and seizure. At the hearing on the defendant’s motion the arresting officer, Manuel Blanco, testified that at the time of the defendant’s arrest, the officer was participating in an undercover drag operation. Blanco and his partner sat in the front seat of an unmarked vehicle one block over from where the actual drag sale was occurring. Blanco was to stay out of view while the actual drag purchase took place, and, when undercover officers gave him the cue, to make the arrests.
Blanco and his partner lowered their car windows to get a clear view. It was then that they heard Dennis yell “Ninety-nine,” “ninety-nine,” a street term meaning police in the area. At that point, several people in the immediate vicinity took off running. On cross-examination, Blanco said that his sole purpose that evening was to apprehend the person selling the drugs. The officer conceded that Dennis was never a target, and said that he would have to check the log to see if the actual target was caught. The officers placed Dennis under arrest for yelling “Ninety-nine.” When they searched him, they found several rocks of crack cocaine in his pocket.
The trial judge granted defendant’s motion to suppress, finding that there was no testimony indicating defendant was aware of anyone selling drags several blocks away. Words alone generally cannot support a charge of obstruction of justice, see D.G. v. State, 661 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Dennis was correct in his assertion that there was no evidence connecting him to the drag deal and also no evidence that his yelling “Ninety-nine” resulted in the target getting away. The arresting officer’s observation that he would need to check the log to see if the actual target had been caught, shows the officer had no knowledge or probable cause on which to predicate Dennis’s arrest. This makes the instant case vastly different from Porter v. State, 582 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) where it was known that the defendant was part of the criminal activity, since he was acting as a lookout. Because Dennis did not commit a crime by yelling “Ninety-nine,” the arrest was illegal, and the evidence found as a result of the subsequent search was properly suppressed. .
Accordingly, the order under review is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
JAY v. State, 731 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…from which they escaped apprehension. The two women simply walked away and were never arrested. In State v. Dennis, during a drug sale, two officers waited out of sight for the undercover officer’s cue to move in and arrest the dealers. See Dennis, 684 So. 2d 848, 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). The defendant saw the two officers waiting in an unmarked car and yelled “ninety nine,” a street term meaning police were in the area. See Dennis, 684 So. 2d at 849. The court concluded that Dennis’ words did not obstruct ju…
-
Francis v. State, 736 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…íne was per se insufficient under section 843.02 to constitute obstruction. In this regard, courts have held that, with limited exceptions,2 physical conduct must accompany offensive words to support a conviction under this statute. State v. Dennis, 684 So. 2d 848, 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); D.G. v. State, 661 So. 2d 75, 76 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Wilkerson v. State, 556 So. 2d 453, 456 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. den., 564 So. 2d 1088 (Fla.1990). However, the record reflects that Nellie, in addition to stating these words…
-
R.E.D. v. State, 903 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…me district which considered both cases went in opposite directions. See also J.V. v. State, 763 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (majority and dissenting opinions). Even our district has not been completely clear-on this subject. See State v. Dennis, 684 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). In its brief, the defense puts considerable reliance on our Dennis decision. In that case, officers were hiding out in a car waiting for their cue to make an arrest following the sale of drugs at a distant location, when Dennis…
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
- D.G. v. State, 661 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Porter v. State, 582 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)