STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
HERNANDO PELECIO CLARKE, 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 Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's order suppressing evidence, holding that the officer had probable cause to stop Clarke, and remanded for consideration of the actual issues raised by the parties.
A law enforcement officer had probable cause to stop the defendant's vehicle, making the trial court's suppression order erroneous as a matter of law.
[1] A stop of an automobile is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment where police have probable cause to believe a traffic violation has occurred, or where the vehicle is bei…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHernando Pelecio Clarke was stopped by law enforcement, and Clarke moved to suppress evidence from that stop. The trial court granted the motion to su…
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 Traffic Violation cases and more on FLexlaw
The State appeals the trial court’s order granting Hernando Pelecio Clarke’s motion to suppress. Because the trial court erred when it concluded that the law enforcement officer did not have probable cause to stop Clarke, an issue not contested below, we reverse and remand for consideration of the actual issues raised by the parties.1 See State v. Johns, 920 So.2d 1156, 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (reversing order granting motion to suppress, but remanding for further consideration because the trial court did not address whether the defendant’s consent was voluntary).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ORFINGER, BERGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Coryon Leairs Nelson, 183 So. 3d 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)…elson was the location where they were initially parked in the parking lot. Therefore, we reverse the orders under review and remand these cases to the trial court for consideration of these issues consistent with. this;opinion. See State v. Clarke, 147 So. 3d 664 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014); Nash, 957 So. 2d at 1267. REVERSED and REMANDED. • EVANDER, J., concurs. TORPY, C.J., concurs and concurs specially, with opinion. . The term "business district" is defined as "[t]he territory contiguous to, and including, a…
Authorities Cited
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1996)
- Holland v. State, 696 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1997)
- State v. Rodriguez, 904 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
- State v. Johns, 920 So. 2d 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- State v. LEE, 957 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)