JEFFREY FAWDRY, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 2014-05-22
No. SC11-1179
POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur., CANADY, J., dissents.
139 So. 3d 868 Florida Supreme Court (2014)

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.


Holding

The court granted review, quashed the prior decision, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with Smallwood.


Facts & Procedural History

The First District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court order denying a motion to suppress evidence from a cell phone search incident to arrest. The…

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.


Opinion of the Court
LEWIS, J.

LEWIS, J.

We have for review Fawdry v. State, 70 So.3d 626, 627 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), in which the First District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court order that denied a motion to suppress evidence found on a cellular phone without a search warrant. The First District certified the following question as one of great public importance:

DOES THE HOLDING IN U.S. v. ROBINSON, 414 U.S. 218 [94 S.Ct. 467, 38 L.Ed.2d 427] (1973) ALLOW A POLICE OFFICER TO SEARCH THROUGH PHOTOGRAPHS CONTAINED WITHIN A CELL PHONE WHICH IS ON AN ARRESTEE’S PERSON AT THE TIME OF A VALID ARREST?

Id. at 630-31. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

We stayed proceedings in this case pending the disposition of Smallwood v. State, 113 So.3d 724 (Fla.2013). When Smallwood became final, we issued an order directing Respondent to show cause why this Court should not accept jurisdiction, summarily quash the decision in Faw-dry, and remand for reconsideration in light of the decision in Smallwood. Respondent filed a response, but Petitioner did not reply.

Upon consideration of the response, we grant the petition for review, quash the decision in Fawdry, and remand this case to the First District Court of Appeal for *869further proceedings consistent with the decision in Smallwood.

It is so ordered.

POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.

CANADY, J., dissents.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw