STEPHEN LANIER, 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.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion to suppress and the constitutionality of the statute.
Stephen Lanier was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance and resisting an officer. He moved to suppress evidence, alleging un…
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 Constitutionality Of Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
Stephen Lanier was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance pursuant to section 893.13(6)(a), Florida Statutes (2009), as well as resisting an officer without violence. Lanier filed a motion to suppress, alleging that he was seized without a warrant or probable cause, and therefore the subsequent search of his person was unauthorized under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Following the denial *1131of his motion to suppress, Lanier entered into a negotiated plea, specifically reserving the right to appeal the trial court’s ruling.
Although not raised below, in addition to challenging the denial of his motion to suppress, on appeal Lanier also challenges the constitutionality of Chapter 893, citing Shelton v. Secretary, Department of Corrections, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D11, 802 F.Supp.2d 1289, 2011 WL 3236040 (M.D.Fla.2011).
Finding no error, we affirm. See Flagg v. State, 74 So.3d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
AFFIRMED.
SAWAYA and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Adkins, 96 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 2012)…s of due process. See Harris v. State, 932 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Burnette v. State, 901 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Taylor v. State, 929 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Wright v. State, 920 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Lanier v. State, 74 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently concluded, however, that section 893.13 is unconstitutional because it does not require sufficient mens rea on the part of the defendant to sustain a…
-
Brockington v. State, 76 So. 3d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Little v. State, 77 So. 3d 722, 2011 WL 5554812 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), and cases cited therein; see also Lanier v. State, 74 So. 3d 1130 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011); Young v. State, 75 So. 3d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).…
Authorities Cited
- Flagg v. State, 74 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Holmes v. State, 74 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)