MIKE PERSEO, ALIAS ORVILLE LOUIS HAWTHORNE, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (34 total)

• Earman v. State, 265 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1972)
  …hat arrest was proper. The District Court said: . . the officers’ failure to comply with the statutory requirements of F.S. Section 901.19(1), F.S.A., comes within the exception announced by this court in the case of State v. Clarke, Fla.App. 1970, 242 So. 2d 791, i. e., that the arresting officers could reasonably fear that the evidence would be destroyed had they delayed their entrance in order to comply with the statute. We recognize that we apply the Clarke exception here as a matter of law since none of…
• State v. Bamber, 630 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 1994)
  …s justified under “the particular circumstances of this case.” Ker, 374 U.S. at 40, 83 S.Ct. at 1634. Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal eschewed the particularity approach in favor of the blanket approach in the key case of State v. Clarke, 242 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), cert. denied, 246 So. 2d 112 (Fla.1971). There, the district court used a two-step analysis. First, it expanded the four Bene-field exceptions noted above to include a fifth, the so-called Clarke exception: The knock-and-announc…
• Pomerantz v. State, 372 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
  …lected; Sheff v. State, 329 So. 2d 270 (Fla.1976); Spinkellink v. State, 313 So. 2d 666 (Fla.1975); State v. Ashby, 245 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1971); State v. Parnell, 221 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1969); Fletcher v. State, 65 So. 2d 845 (Fla.1953); State v. Clarke, 242 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970); Boim v. State, 194 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967). Such plain sight seizures have been treated either as an exception to the search warrant requirement rule, Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 464-473, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L.E…