A.B.S., 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.
A juvenile appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence of a controlled substance found during a warrantless search of his person. The court reversed, holding that an officer lacked legal authority to search the juvenile's person when taking him into custody as a possible runaway under Florida's dependency statute, as the search-incident-to-arrest exception does not apply to non-criminal custody situations.
The court held that the officer lacked legal authority to search A.B.S.'s person. The search-incident-to-arrest exception does not apply because circumstances allowing a juvenile to be taken into custody under section 984.13 are not crimes. Additionally, the officer had no indication A.B.S. possessed a weapon or contraband, so no independent justification existed for the search.
[1] A search of a person incident to taking them into custody as a runaway in need of services is not a search incident to arrest, as the circumstances do not constitute a cr…
[2] An officer's policy to search individuals before transporting them in a police cruiser does not, in itself, provide a legal basis for a search absent reasonable suspicion…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“We reverse the denial of A.B.S.'s motion to suppress the contents of the container because the officer did not have a legal basis to search A.B.S.'s person before transporting him in his cruiser.”
Statement of the core holding—the officer lacked any lawful authority to conduct the search.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA.B.S., a juvenile, was taken into custody as a possible runaway in need of services under section 984.13, Fla. Stat. Before placing A.B.S. in the pol…
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 Search cases and more on FLexlaw
A.B.S., a juvenile, seeks review of an order withholding adjudication and placing him on four months of probation for possession of a controlled substance. A.B.S. admitted to the charge while reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. Because the search of A.B.S.’s person was not supported by a legal basis, we reverse.
A.B.S. was taken into custody as a possible runaway in need of services pursuant to section 984.13, Florida Statutes (2009). The officer who took A.B.S. into custody stated that, at a minimum, he was going to take A.B.S. home. Before the officer placed A.B.S. inside his police cruiser, he handcuffed and searched A.B.S. as was his practice. During the search, the officer retrieved a set of keys from the right, front pocket of A.B.S.’s pants. The key-chain had an aluminum screw-top container on it that the officer stated was of the type commonly used to store illegal drugs. The officer shook the container, and it rattled in a way that made the officer suspect there were pills inside. The officer then opened the container and discovered a controlled substance. The officer acknowledged that he did not conduct a pat down before reaching into AB.S.’s pocket.
We reverse the denial of A.B.S.’s motion to suppress the contents of the container because the officer did not have a legal basis to search A.B.S.’s person before transporting him in his cruiser. See L.C. v. State, 23 So.3d 1215, 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). Circumstances that allow a juvenile to be taken into custody under section 984.13 are not crimes; therefore, the search incident to arrest exception to the warrant requirement does not apply. Id.
Further, in this case the officer had no indication that A.B.S. was in possession of either a weapon or contraband when he searched A.B.S. He admitted that he searched A.B.S. solely because it was his policy to search people before transporting them in his cruiser. As the Third District noted in L.C., “Although we appreciate the concern of officer safety, we are aware of no case that stands for the proposition officers can search an individual without having performed a pat-down simply because the individual is being placed in a police vehicle.” Id. at 1219. Because the search was conducted without a legal basis, the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress.
Reversed and remanded.
DAVIS and BLACK, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Collins v. State, 125 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…have been conducted before the search. In arguing that the officers had no right to search him before placing him into a police cruiser, appellant relies upon two juvenile cases: L.C. v. State, 23 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009), and A.B.S. v. State, 51 So. 3d 1181 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). Both cases, however, concern Florida’s truancy statute, Chapter 984.13, Florida Statutes (2007), and do not involve a search conducted during a detention pursuant to the Florida Mental Health Act, Chapter 394.463, Florida Statute…
-
R.A.S. v. State, 141 So. 3d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…cement may take a child into custody if the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the child is a truant. § 984.13(l)(b), Fla. Stat. (2012). But truancy is not a crime, and a custodial detention for this purpose is not an arrest. A.B.S. v. State, 51 So. 3d 1181, 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); L.C. v. State, 23 So. 3d 1215, 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). Therefore, the warrant requirement exception for searches incident to arrest did not apply in this situation. Cf. A.B.S., 51 So. 3d at 1182. It is also the case that…
-
S. M. P. v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…ywhere."). The safety search must be objectively reasonable under the facts of the case. And reasonableness, in these contexts, is typically measured in terms of the search's intrusiveness and the circumstances' necessity. Thus, in A.B.S. v. State, 51 So. 3d 1181, 1182 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), we reversed a juvenile's adjudication for possession of a controlled substance because the officer who had taken the juvenile into custody had no need to unlock and unscrew the container found in the juvenile's pocket. We…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- L.C. v. State, 23 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)