STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
LARRY DONNELL ANDERSON, 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 affirmed the suppression of cocaine and drug paraphernalia seized during an illegal pat-down search where the officer lacked reasonable belief that the suspect was armed.
A pat-down search incident to a Terry stop is unlawful when the officer lacks a reasonable belief based on articulable facts that the person is armed with a dangerous weapon.
[1] A pat-down search incident to a Terry stop requires the officer to have a reasonable belief based on articulable facts that the person is armed with a dangerous weapon; a…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“a pat-down for weapons can occur only when the officer has a reasonable belief based upon articulable facts that the person is armed”
Shaw v. State standard for lawful pat-down searches
Larry Donnell Anderson was charged with possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia after contraband was seized during a pat-down search incident to …
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 Pat-Down For Weapons cases and more on FLexlaw
ANTOON, Chief Judge.
Larry Donnell Anderson was charged with possession of cocaine and drug paraphernalia.1 He filed a pretrial motion to suppress the contraband seized from his person at the time of his arrest, and the trial court granted the motion. The state appeals. We affirm.
After conducting a hearing on Mr. Anderson’s suppression motion, the trial court determined that the contraband was seized from Mr. Anderson as a result of an illegal pat-down. The state challenges the ruling, contending that the pat-down was incident to a lawful Terry stop. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). However, the state failed to submit evidence that, at the time he conducted the pat-down, the arresting officer had a reasonable belief that Mr. Anderson was armed with a dangerous weapon. See Shaw v. State, 611 So. 2d 552, 555 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (holding that a pat-down for weapons can occur only when the officer has a reasonable belief based upon articulable facts that the person is armed). In fact, the arresting officer never testified that he believed that Mr. Anderson was armed. Under these circumstances the trial court was correct in concluding that the pat-down search, was not justified.
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and PETERSON, JJ., concur. . §§ 893.13, 893.147, Fla.Stat. (1997).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968)
- Shaw v. State, 611 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)