ALFRED ELMER SZADY, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed Szady's drug convictions because the affidavit supporting the search-all-persons-present warrant lacked sufficient evidence to establish probable cause that anyone in the home possessed evidence of criminal activity.
A search-all-persons-present warrant requires evidence supporting probable cause that anyone in the described location is involved in criminal activity in such a way as to have evidence of that activity on their person.
[1] A search-all-persons-present warrant requires evidence supporting probable cause that anyone in the described location is involved in criminal activity in such a way as t…
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“the evidence tendered to the issuing magistrate supports the conclusion that it is probable anyone in the described place when the warrant is executed is involved in the criminal activity in such a way as to have evidence of the criminal activity on his person”
Standard for validity of search-all-persons-present warrant from Bergeron v. State
Police executed a search-all-persons-present warrant at a home and discovered cocaine and drug paraphernalia on Szady's person. The warrant was based …
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 Confidential Informant Reliability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Alfred Szady (“Szady”) appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia. Police discovered the contraband on Szady’s person after executing a search-all-persons-present warrant at a home. Szady argues that the issuing magistrate did not have sufficient evidence to justify the search-all-persons-present warrant, and the trial court subsequently erred in denying his motion to suppress. We agree.
The search-all-persons-present warrant is unobjectionable if the evidence tendered to the issuing magistrate supports the conclusion that it is probable anyone in the described place when the warrant is executed is involved in the criminal activity in such a way as to have evidence of the criminal activity on his person.
Bergeron v. State, 583 So. 2d 790, 791-792 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).
In the instant case, the issuing magistrate reviewed a police officer’s affidavit, which described a confidential informant’s single buy of an undisclosed amount of cocaine within the previous ten days. The affidavit contained no additional facts. We do not believe the officer’s affidavit supports a reasonable conclusion that it is probable that anyone in the described home is involved in criminal activity in such a way as to have evidence of the criminal activity on his or her person.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with these findings.
PATTERSON, C.J., THREADGILL and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lowe v. State, 751 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…s which are driven onto the property during the search. I would compare this to a “search-all-persons” warrant, which requires evidence be presented to the issuing magistrate supporting the search of anyone in the described home. See Szady v. State, 745 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). More telling is the failure of the inventory, required by section 933.12, Florida Statues (1995), to include any of the items for which Lowe was arrested. The statute in question requires a return of the warrant and, attached t…
Authorities Cited
- Bergeron v. State, 583 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)