TERRANCE JACKSON, 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.
Terrance Jackson challenges the denial of his motion to suppress cocaine found in shorts he removed from his duffle bag during a consensual bus search. The court held that Jackson's act of removing the shorts from the bag constituted a withdrawal of consent, and reversed the trial court's order denying suppression.
Jackson's removal of the shorts from the duffle bag during the search indicated withdrawal of his prior consent to search the shorts. Because the facts compel only one reasonable conclusion—that Jackson withdrew consent before police developed probable cause to believe he possessed contraband—the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress.
[1] An individual may define the scope of a consensual search.
[2] A person may withdraw consent to a search at any time during the search, through words or actions.
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 intelligence“An individual may define as he chooses the scope of a consensual search.”
Establishes the foundational principle that consent can be limited in scope by the person consenting.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTwo police officers conducting random luggage checks on a Greyhound bus asked Jackson for permission to search his duffle bag and all containers there…
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 Withdrawal Of Consent cases and more on FLexlaw
STEVENSON, J.
Appellant, Terrance Jackson, challenges the trial court’s order denying his motion to suppress cocaine discovered in a pair of shorts that he removed from his duffle bag during a consensual search. Appellant argues that his act of removing the shorts from the bag demonstrated that the scope of his consent did not include the shorts. We agree with appellant and reverse.
After appellant boarded a greyhound bus, two police officers conducting random checks of passenger luggage for contraband and firearms asked appellant for permission to search his bag and all containers therein. Appellant consented to the search and unzipped the bag, saying “see, there’s nothing in here.” While the officers shifted items in the bag, appellant removed a pair of shorts and placed them next to him on his seat. Noticing something oblong wrapped in the shorts, one of the officers grabbed them because he suspected appellant was hiding something since appellant was being “a little bit too cooperative.” Thereafter, the officer uncovered a package which contained cocaine.
An individual may define as he chooses the scope of a consensual search. See Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248, 250, 111 S.Ct. 1801, 114 L.Ed.2d 297 (1991). Additionally, once consent has been given, the individual may, at any time during the search, withdraw consent by words or actions. See Jimenez v. State, 643 So. 2d 70, 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)(holding that although the defendant initially consented to a pat-down search, he withdrew his consent when he twice grabbed the deputy’s hand in an apparent attempt to stop the search of the cigarette package in his pocket).
Appellant’s removal of the shorts from the duffle bag during the search indicated that he withdrew any prior consent to the search of the shorts. Because the uncon-tradieted facts compel but one reasonable conclusion — that appellant withdrew consent before the police developed probable cause to believe that he possessed contraband — we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. See Goldberg v. State, 407 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)(holding that the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress because the defendant withdrew consent to the search, and the officer admitted that only a hunch suggested that an oblong package in the suspect’s pocket contained contraband).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DELL and HAZÓURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 995 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…y relevant time period to determine if an individual has given voluntary consent is at the time of the search. Once consent is given, it can be withdrawn at any time for any reason. It can be withdrawn by an individual’s words (see Jackson v. State, 730 So. 2d 364, 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)) (stating “the individual may, at any time during the search, withdraw consent by words”), or by an individual’s actions. See Lowery v. State, 894 So. 2d 1032, 1034 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (finding consent was withdrawn when the…
-
Brown v. State, 789 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…hin the arrestee's immediate control. When a search is conducted based upon consent, however, the scope of the search depends upon the nature and extent of the consent. See, e.g., Jacobs v. State, 733 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Jackson v. State, 730 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Thus, Moore and Loftis do not apply. . In State v. Walton, 565 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), the Fifth District also based its conclusion heavily on the fact that Walton stood silent while the search progressed. There was evi…
-
Lowery v. State, 894 So. 2d 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…1994) (holding that although the defendant initially gave consent to a pat-down search, he withdrew consent when he twice grabbed the deputy’s hand in an apparent attempt to stop the search of the cigarette package in his pocket); Jackson v. State, 730 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (stating that the defendant withdrew consent to search shorts in a duffle bag before officers developed probable cause for search of the shorts). But see Towner v. State, 713 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (stating that there wa…
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
- Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (U.S. 1991)
- Jimenez v. State, 643 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Goldberg v. State, 407 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)