DAVID LEE MCRAE, 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.
David Lee McRae appeals his conviction for armed robbery, challenging the legality of his arrest and search, the voluntariness of his confession, and the sufficiency of evidence. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction, finding probable cause for arrest, lawful search incident to arrest, voluntary confession, and overwhelming evidence of guilt.
The court held that probable cause was clearly established for McRae's arrest, the search of his person was lawful as incident to arrest, the inventory search of the vehicle was proper, and his incriminating statements were voluntary and admissible. The guilt of the defendant was overwhelming.
[1] A search of a person incident to a lawful arrest is permissible.
[2] An inventory search of an impounded vehicle is permissible.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Probable cause was clearly established for the appellant's arrest and the search of his person was incident to this lawful arrest.”
Establishes the court's holding regarding the lawfulness of the search incident to arrest.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice responded to a radio dispatch reporting an armed robbery involving a 1965 or 1966 blue GTO convertible with distinctive racing stripes running …
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 Inventory Search cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant-defendant, David Lee McRae, appeals from a judgment of conviction of robbery by force and violence and sentence of 75 years. He poses three points on appeal :
1. The police unlawfully searched appellant’s person and automobile without a warrant or probable cause.
2. The totality of circumstances demonstrates that the State failed to carry its burden of proving appellant’s incriminating statements were not involuntary.
3. The State failed as a matter of law to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.
A deputy sheriff testified that on the evening of the robbery his patrol car was notifed by radio transmission that an armed robbery had taken place; that an automobile, described as a 1965 or 1966 GTO convertible, blue colored, with racing stripes running “across the trunk of the automobile rather than lengthways from one side of the car to the other”, was involved in the robbery; that he stopped an automobile matching the radio description particularly noting the racing stripes; that he arrested the appellant-driver on the charge of armed robbery, informed appellant of his *134constitutional rights, and made a search of appellant incidental to this arrest. The deputy sheriff removed a .22 caliber revolver from appellant’s front pants pocket, and impounded the automobile. Later, at the county jail, it was ascertained that the car had been stolen. -A “routine” inventory search was made of the contents of the vehicle and a bank moneybag containing approximately $30 in currency and change, together with a black felt hat, were recovered. These articles were subsequently identified in connection with the robbery for which defendant was charged. Appellant was fully advised of his constitutional rights again at the police station and at that time gave an oral confession, including information concerning his accomplices.
At the trial one of appellant’s accomplices testified in detail as to his own part as well as appellant’s full participation in the robbery. Other corroborating evidence was introduced. We will not unduly belabor the appellant’s points on appeal save to observe that the circumstances surrounding this arrest reflect prompt and diligent police work in apprehending the perpetrators of this serious crime. Probable cause was clearly established for the appellant’s arrest and the search of his person was incident to this lawful arrest. The fruits of this legal arrest and the later inventory search of the vehicle were properly admitted into evidence. Circumstances surrounding appellant’s incriminating statements to the law officer on the night of the arrest reflect that they were voluntary and therefore admissible.
Finally, as to the last point, the guilt of this defendant was overwhelming. We observe that if a directed verdict were available on evidentiary matters in a criminal case, the record in this case would have warranted the trial judge granting same.
Affirmed.
JOHNSON, C. J., and RAWLS and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
ST. John v. State, 363 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)…eliability of the information contained in the bolo or that there were other circumstances observed or otherwise known by the police which created the founded suspicion justifying the stop. The state relies upon several cases such as McRae v. State, 245 So. 2d 133 (Fla.1st DCA 1971), and Kaymore v. State, 260 So. 2d 851 (Fla.1st DCA 1972), to support the contention that the mere receipt of a bolo gives an officer the right to stop and detain an individual. A cursory reading of those cases would indicate that…
-
Hansen v. State, 385 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…ithout firsthand knowledge of a crime if he receives a communication from another officer who has probable cause, a deficiency in initial probable cause cannot be rectified by the products of a search conducted after arrest. Compare, McRae v. State, 245 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); Crawford v. State, 334 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1976); State v. Harrington, 307 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1974); and United States v. Trabucco, 424 F. 2d 1311 (5th Cir. 1970) with Whitely v. Warden, 401 U.S. 560, 91 S.Ct. 1031, 2…
-
State v. Rebozo, 265 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…er officer, Jackson, acting on the information obtained by Officer Gardner relayed to him by the radioed bolo, was equally enabled in law to apprehend the described persons. Salas v. State, Fla.App.1971, 246 So. 2d 621; McRae v. State, Fla.App.1971, 245 So. 2d 133. Therefore, there was basis here to stop and apprehend the defendants because of having been seen in possession of marijuana, and the resultant seizure of the narcotics which were found in their possession (and which in fact were in plain sight of t…