STATE
v.
BREWINGTON
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.
The Broward County Court granted the defendant's motion to suppress evidence, finding that the search warrant was not executed in compliance with Florida Statute 933.11 because the duplicate warrant was not signed or sealed by a judicial officer.
Yes, the evidence seized should be suppressed because the search warrant was not executed in compliance with Florida Statute 933.11.
“the defendant's motion to suppress be and the same is hereby granted and that the evidence seized as the fruits of said search be and the same are hereby suppressed.”
Establishes the court's ruling on the motion to suppress.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence seized during a search of her premises. The search was conducted under a warrant, and the defendant …
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 Search Warrant Execution cases and more on FLexlaw
Order suppressing evidence: This cause came on to be heard on the defendant’s motion to suppress before the undersigned judge on the 18th day of April, 1967, and the court having heard the testimony of the defendant, and having considered her exhibit, that is, her duplicate of a search warrant under which her premises were searched, and the court having further considered the testimony of the arresting officers, it is thereupon
Ordered and adjudged that the defendant’s motion to suppress be and the same is hereby granted and that the evidence seized as the fruits of said search be and the same are hereby suppressed. *97The court finds that the search warrant under which said property was seized was not executed in compliance with Florida Statute 933.11 in that the duplicate delivered to the defendant under which her premises were searched was neither signed nor sealed before a judicial officer, see Pell v. State, 122 So. 110.