RICARDO ALVAREZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Ricardo Alvarez was convicted of drug possession after officers discovered cocaine and a glass pipe in his car during a traffic stop. The appellate court reversed, holding that the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to detain Alvarez and that the evidence was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights.
The court held that the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to believe Alvarez was committing or had committed a crime, and that requesting him to exit his legally parked vehicle constituted an illegal seizure. Because the detention was unlawful, all evidence discovered as a result was inadmissible.
[1] A police officer's suspicion that a person may be attempting to commit a crime, without a factual basis, does not establish reasonable suspicion for a stop.
[2] A request for a person to exit a legally parked vehicle constitutes a seizure when a reasonable person would believe they must comply.
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“We conclude that the officers lacked a reasonable suspicion to believe he was committing or had committed a crime.”
Establishes the core holding that the initial detention was unconstitutional
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOfficers observed Alvarez seated in the driver's seat of a legally parked car adjacent to an apartment complex at 4:00 a.m. He was leaned over in his …
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 Unlawful Seizure cases and more on FLexlaw
ROSMAN, Jay B., Associate Judge.
Ricardo Alvarez challenges his final judgment and sentences for possession of cocaine, possession of less than twenty grams of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia, contending that the trial court erred in its denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Because we agree that the officers illegally stopped him, we reverse.
The officers observed the appellant seated in the driver’s seat in a legally parked car adjacent to an apartment complex at 4:00 a.m. He was leaned over in his seat, and when the officers approached, he adjusted his seat and cooperated with them. The officers discovered no problems with the appellant’s identification or his vehicle’s license. There had been no reports of burglaries or thefts in the area that night and no reports of other criminal activity. The officers suspected that he may have been attempting to commit a crime, but they lacked a factual basis for their conclusion. Because of their general suspicion and the appellant’s baggy clothes, the officers asked the appellant to exit the car. As he did so, they observed a glass cocaine pipe on the floorboard. A subsequent search produced additional contraband.
We conclude that the officers lacked a reasonable suspicion to believe he was committing or had committed a crime. § 901.151(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). Certainly, they were justified in making a brief detention to investigate the situation.
However, no further circumstances arose as a consequence of the limited detention to bolster their mere suspicion that criminal activity was afoot.
Thus, when the officers asked the appellant to exit his car, he was seized. Popple v. State, 626 So. 2d 185 (Fla.1993). The officer’s request that Alvarez exit his car “constituted a show of authority which restrained [his] freedom of movement because a reasonable person under the circumstances would believe that he should comply. See Dees v. State, 564 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).” 626 So. 2d at 188. Legally parked cars do not give police officers a basis for detaining or searching persons therein. Sites v. State, 582 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
Moreover, because the appellant was illegally detained, the officers were not entitled to be in the place where they observed the pipe. G.J.P. v. State, 469 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and WHATLEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Baez, 894 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 2004)…d that Popple’s suppression motion should have been granted. Under that holding, Taylor’s suppression motion was properly granted. This case is virtually indistinguishable from Miranda v. State, 816 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), Alvarez v. State, 695 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), and the cases cited therein. In Miranda, the arresting officer observed a legally parked car in the back of an apartment complex parking lot at 5:00 a.m. in an area of prior criminal activity. The court held that this observation…
-
State v. Taylor, 826 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…as detained, and the consensual encounter between Malone and Taylor became a Terry stop, when the [*403] officer asked Taylor to get out of and step away from the car.5 Popple; Ippolito v. State, 789 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Alvarez v. State, 695 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Bowen v. State, 685 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). However, that seizure was not supported by the requisite “well-founded, articulable suspicion of criminal activity.” Popple, at 186. This case is controlled by the holding in P…1 / 4
-
Allen v. State, 703 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…detention of the men was unlawful. Allen’s motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of that detention should have been granted. Popple, 626 So. 2d at 188. See also, Zelinski v. State, 695 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Alvarez v. State, 695 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). We reverse and remand with directions to discharge Allen. PARKER, C.J., and FULMER, J., 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
- Tedd J. Popple v. State, 626 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1993)
- G.J.P. v. State, 469 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Dees v. State, 564 So. 2d 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Sites v. State, 582 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)