LEROY BUTLER, 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 affirmed Butler's conviction for armed burglary and sexual battery despite finding that DNA evidence was obtained in violation of section 943.325(1)(a), because the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied to the search warrant under which the blood samples were drawn.
Although DNA evidence was obtained in violation of section 943.325(1)(a), Florida Statutes, the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule permits admission of the evidence because it was obtained pursuant to a valid search warrant.
[1] The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule permits admission of DNA evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant even when the statutory authority for the DNA te…
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 intelligenceLeroy Butler was convicted of armed burglary and sexual battery with use of a deadly weapon. Blood samples were drawn from him pursuant to a search wa…
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 Constitutional Application Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
STRINGER, Judge.
Leroy Butler challenges his conviction and sentence for armed burglary and sexual battery with use of a deadly weapon. He contends that the DNA evidence which led to his conviction should have been suppressed because it was obtained by the erroneous and unconstitutional application of section 943.325(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996),1 which requires DNA testing for certain violent offenders. At the time that blood samples were drawn from him, Butler was not incarcerated for one of the offenses enumerated in the statute. Although we agree that the statute did not apply to him, we affirm. Butler’s blood was drawn pursuant to a search warrant, and after reviewing the warrant and application, we are persuaded that the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule saved this evidence from suppression. See United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984).
Affirmed.
BLUE, C.J., and DAVIS, J., Concur. . Section 943.325(l)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), provides:
Any person convicted, or who was previously convicted and is still incarcerated, in this state for any offense or attempted offense defined in chapter 794, chapter 800, s. 782.04, s. 784.045, s. 812.133, or s. 812.135, and who is within the confines of the legal state boundaries, shall be required to submit two specimens of blood to a Department of Law Enforcement designated testing facility as directed by the department.