MILTON MAY, 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.
Milton May appeals his drug convictions, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress contraband found during a traffic stop. The court affirmed, holding that May was lawfully detained as a passenger during the arrest of the driver and that he abandoned the drugs, making them admissible evidence.
The court held that May was lawfully detained as a passenger during the valid arrest of the driver, and therefore the contraband he abandoned during this legal detention was properly admitted as evidence against him.
[1] A passenger in a vehicle may be lawfully detained during a lawful traffic stop and search incident to the driver's arrest.
[2] Contraband abandoned by a defendant during a lawful detention is admissible evidence.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If a defendant abandons property as a result of an illegal detention, the trial court should suppress the evidence.”
Establishes the legal standard for suppression based on illegal detention and abandonment
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeputy Cronin stopped a truck driven by Raymond Maines for a missing tag light. Maines admitted his license was suspended, providing probable cause fo…
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 Abandonment Of Contraband cases and more on FLexlaw
LaROSE, Judge.
Milton May appeals his convictions and sentences for possession of marijuana, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia. He argues that the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress contraband found during a traffic stop of a truck in which he was a passenger. Because Mr. May was legally detained and abandoned the contraband, we affirm.
Deputy Cronin stopped a truck driven by Raymond Maines because it had no tag light. He asked Mr. Maines for his license and registration; he asked Mr. May for identification. Mr. Maines admitted that his license was suspended, thus providing probable cause for his arrest. See Renard v. State, 675 So. 2d 1006, 1008 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); State v. Pugh, 635 So. 2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Mr. May gave Deputy Cronin an identification card. Deputy Cronin returned to his cruiser to run a name check. Deputy Kincaid arrived as backup. He walked around the truck to ensure there was nothing on the ground. Deputy Cronin returned to the truck to arrest Mr. Maines and ordered him out of the vehicle. Mr. May tried to exit at the same time, but Deputy Cronin ordered him to stay inside.
As Deputy Cronin talked to Mr. Maines, Deputy Kincaid stood by the right passenger door. Mr. May attempted to reach into his jacket pocket. Mr. May opened the door and tried to exit several times, but Deputy Kincaid directed him to stay in the truck. At one point, Deputy Kincaid saw a small blue pouch, an orange pill bottle, and a pack of cigarettes fall to the ground from the passenger side. He no ticed that Mr. May’s jacket pocket was turned inside out.
After arresting Mr. Maines, Deputy Cronin placed him in the cruiser. Even though the deputies had the right to search the truck incident to the arrest, see State v. Frierson, 926 So. 2d 1139, 1145 (Fla.2006), Mr. Maines consented to a search of his truck. All the while, Mr. May remained seated in the truck. Deputy Cronin left Mr. Maines secured in the cruiser and returned to the truck to talk to Mr. May.
Deputy Kincaid told Deputy Cronin that Mr. May had dropped the pouch, pill bottle, and cigarette pack from the truck. Deputy Kincaid examined these items and found a syringe, baggies of methamphetamine, marijuana, and a spoon with methamphetamine residue. Mr. May admitted to owning the cigarette pack. When Deputy Cronin searched the truck bed, he found a duffle bag containing a scale dusted with methamphetamine residue. The bag also contained a letter addressed to Mr. May.1 Mr. May was arrested for drug-related offenses.
Mr. May moved to suppress the contraband found on the ground, arguing that Deputy Kincaid seized it through an illegal detention and search. The State argued that Mr. May was legally detained and had abandoned the contraband. See Williams v. State, 640 So. 2d 1206, 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). The trial court agreed with the State and denied Mr. May’s motion.
If a defendant abandons property as a result of an illegal detention, the trial court should suppress the evidence. Welch v. State, 689 So. 2d 1240, 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Cox v. State, 586 So. 2d 1321, 1322 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Here, however, the deputies lawfully detained Mr. May. See State v. Holland, 680 So. 2d 1041, 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), aff'd, 696 So. 2d 757 (Fla.1997) (holding that detention is legal where valid objective reason supports it). Because Mr. Maines’ driver’s license was suspended, Deputy Cronin had reasonable cause to arrest him; thus, he also had authority to search the truck incident to the arrest. See Frierson, 926 So. 2d at 1144. All occupants may be detained during a valid search of a vehicle. See State v. Cromatie, 668 So. 2d 1075, 1077 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); State v. Breed, 917 So. 2d 206, 209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). The contraband found on the ground was admissible against Mr. May because he abandoned it during his legal detention. See Williams, 640 So. 2d at 1208. Consequently, we affirm the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress.
Affirmed.
CASANUEVA and SALCINES, JJ., Concur. . The items discovered in the truck bed were not the subject of Mr. May's motion to suppress.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 995 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…CA 2007) (“[Ojnce Boles consented to the search of his vehicle, certain procedures such as his removal from the vehicle were objectively reasonable and could be characterized as ensuring the orderly completion of the search”); see also May v. State, 958 So. 2d 402, 404 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); State v. Breed, 917 So. 2d 206, 209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). Although the facts were in dispute concerning whether the Appellant consented to a search of his person, as the majority opinion explains, the trial court accepted t…1 / 2
Authorities Cited (12 total)
- Holland v. State, 696 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1997)
- State v. Frierson, 926 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2006)
- Ulysses R. Williams v. State, 640 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- B.S.W. v. State, 668 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- State v. Cromatie, 668 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Rennard v. State, 675 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- State v. Breed, 917 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- COX v. State, 586 So. 2d 1321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- State v. Gagne, 680 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
- State v. Holland, 680 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)