JOE LEWIS MURPHY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Arrest Without Warrant cases and more on FLexlaw
On appeal by the defendant from conviction of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, the contention presented is that the trial court committed error in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained upon search following arrest and in denying defendant’s motion for acquittal at the close of the plaintiff’s case, on the ground that the arrest was unlawful.
*262The officer who made the arrest had observed the defendant in the commission of a felony for which he subsequently was arrested. The officer had filed charges with the state attorney for issuance of an arrest warrant. Thereafter, assuming the warrant had been issued, the arrest was made. The trial court was not in error in rejecting the defendant’s contention of unlawful arrest. On the facts of this case, Gossett v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So.2d 836, relied on by the appellant is not applicable. The arrest was lawful under § 901.15 Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; either under subsection (4) if the warrant was outstanding, or under subsection (3) thereof in the absence of a warrant.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Frierson, 926 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 2006)…ght to search the defendant incident to that arrest. The Third District clearly said, “We hold that the arrest of the appellant was valid under the bench warrants which were revealed to the officer by radio check. See Murphy v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 252 So. 2d 261, Fla. Stat.; §§ 901.15(4), 901.16, F.S.A. Further, the search of appellee’s person incident to such arrest was reasonable.” Foust, 262 So. 2d at 688. In this case, I believe that the Fourth District’s statement concerning probable cause was mere di…
-
State v. Foust, 262 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…indicated.] [*688] % % ‡ * * * See also State v. Holmes, Fla.App.1971, 256 So. 2d 32. We hold that the arrest of the appellant was valid under the bench warrants which were revealed to the officer by radio check. See Murphy v. State, Fla.App.1971, 252 So. 2d 261; Fla.Stat. §§ 901.15(4), 901.16, F.S.A. Further, the search of appellee’s person incident to such arrest was reasonable. It is also our view that the reasonableness of the search after arrest was not affected by the fact that the original stopping o…
-
Novak v. State, 268 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman, Fla.1971, 253 So. 2d 129, and as to an additional point see Murphy v. State, Fla.App.1971, 252 So. 2d 261.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gossett v. State, 188 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)