J. HAROLD DAVIS
v.
STATE
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 reviewed a conviction for a liquor law violation, where the conviction was based on evidence seized under a search warrant. The court found the search warrant insufficient because it failed to adequately describe the items to be seized, despite having sufficient probable cause for the search itself.
No, the search warrant was insufficient because it did not reasonably describe the things to be searched for and seized, even though the affidavit and warrant showed probable cause for the search itself.
“An affidavit for a search warrant based on information and belief is not for that reason alone insufficient in law, provided the source of the information and belief is fully stated in issuable form so that the courts may determine from the recitals of the warrant after issuance, whether the facts recited in the affidavit as the source of the affiant’s information and belief, constitute probable cause in contemplation of law to authorize the issuance of a search warrant.”
Establishes the standard for sufficiency of an affidavit based on information and belief.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was convicted of a second offense liquor law violation. The conviction relied on evidence seized from his home pursuant to a search warr…
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 Search Warrant Affidavit cases and more on FLexlaw
In this case error was assigned on the contested admission in evidence against the accused of the results of a search of defendant’s premises for intoxicating liquors pursuant to an affidavit and search warrant that plaintiff in error asserts was illegal and insufficient for the purposes of search and seizure of liquors from his dwelling house. The defendant was convicted of violation of the liquor law (second offense), and from the judgment and sentence imposed, he prosecutes this writ of error.
An affidavit for a search warrant based on information and belief is not for that reason alone insufficient in law, provided the source of the information and belief is fully stated in issuable form so that the courts may determine *714from the recitals of the warrant after issuance, whether the facts recited in the affidavit as the source of the affiant’s information and belief, constitute probable cause in contemplation of law to authorize the issuance of a search warrant.
i In this case the source of the affiant’s information and belief is sufficiently stated and the premises to be searched are sufficiently described. But the thing or things to be searched for and seized under the warrant are in no respect sufficiently mentioned or described. Therefore the affi-; davit and search warrant, while not defective in- its allegations showing probable cause for judicially authorizing the search prayed for, is wholly insufficient as authority of law for searching the place described therein, because of the omission to reasonably describe the thing or things to be searched for and seized pursuant to the terms of the warrant.
The search warrant being insufficient, should have been quashed on motion to the issuing magistrate, or the evidence seized under it suppressed at the trial upon the timely motion therefor made by defendant. See Gildrie v. State, 94 Fla. 134, 113 Sou. Rep. 704; Section 22 of Declaration of Rights.
Reversed.
Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Edelmira Chacon v. State, 102 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 1957)…was insufficient to support the issuance of the warrant and subsequent search. We are not here confronted with an affidavit based on information and belief. Illustrative of the rule covering affidavits on information and belief, see Davis v. State, 113 Fla. 713, 152 So. 6. While admittedly the affidavit in this instance might have been made stronger, the fact remains that it meets the basic requirements of the Constitution and the implementing statute as well as our opinion in Perez v. State, supra. On th…
-
Melton v. State, 75 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1954)…where the search warrant is wholly invalid, as is the case here, there can be no valid search and seizure by virtue of its provisions' alone and consequently there can be no valid arrest by virtue of a seizure of property thereunder. Davis v. State, 113 Fla. 713, 152 So. 6. As to the second question raised on appeal, it is settled that a peace officer may arrest without warrant when he has reasonable grounds to believe and- does believe that a felony has been or is about to be committed in his presence • a…
-
Gus Garcia v. State, 110 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)…ecitals of conclusions and alleged beliefs grounded on information from persons unknown or unnamed have long been condemned by the Florida Supreme Court as being insufficient to support a judicial determination of probable cause. See Davis v. State, 113 Fla. 713, 152 So. 6, involving recitals in an application for a search warrant, and Collins v. State, Fla.1953, 65 So. 2d 61, involving question of probable cause for search of a vehicle without a warrant. At the hearing on the pre-trial motion to suppress…
Authorities Cited
- Gildrie v. State, 94 Fla. 134 (Fla. 1927)