RICHARD S. KEENER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE; JOHN K. SMITH, 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.
The court held that the officer's actions in detaining the passenger and seizing the marijuana exceeded the legal cause for the initial stop.
A police officer stopped a car with a broken taillight and, after a radio check and questioning, became suspicious of the passenger. The passenger fle…
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 Terry Stop cases and more on FLexlaw
MANN, Chief Judge.
Keener’s 1952 Pontiac was manufactured 20 years before automobiles were required in Florida to have two tail lamps,1 but a policeman stopped him. Keener got out of the car and came back toward the officer. He exhibited his driver’s license, which was in order. The officer checked by radio on the license tag and determined that the automobile was not stolen. Its inspection sticker was current. The officer testified that his “curosity” was “kind of aroused” and he began to interrogate Smith, who was the passenger in the car. An ordinary brown grocery bag was under the seat and the officer inquired about it. Finally Smith grabbed the bag, threw it across the car to the floor board on the driver’s side, told the officer, “I guess I don’t have a name” and fled. The bag contained marijuana. It was not suppressed. It should have been.
There are now many circumstances in which an officer who does not have probable cause to make an arrest is justified in detaining a citizen to determine whether a crime has been committed.2 It may well have been proper for the officer to stop this car, equipped with one taillight when the law required two. Most citizens would appreciate knowing that one light was out. We need not determine this question. Assuming that the police officer was then acting properly, he later went too far without legal cause.
Reversed and remanded.
HOBSON and GRIMES, JJ., concur. . Fla.Stat. § 316.221, F.S.A., (1971).
. See, LaFave, “Street Encounters” and the Constitution: Terry, Sibron, Peters, and Beyond, 67 Mich.L.Rev. 40 (1968) ; and numerous authorities cited therein, and the Florida cases on pretextual arrest cited in State v. Holmes, Fla.App.2d 1971, 256 So. 2d 32.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bailey v. State, 295 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)…based on mere suspicion, it must be based on facts known to exist and in this case there was no testimony of any facts known to exist upon which the search of the automobile could be predicated. See Keener v. State, Second District Court of Appeal, 290 So. 2d 513, opinion filed February 22, 1974; Hearns v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 262 So. 2d 907; cf. F.S. Sec. 933.19, F.S.A.; see also Richardson v. State, First District Court of Appeal, 291 So. 2d 253, opinion filed March 14, 1974. Furthermore, there.is no evi…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Holmes, 256 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)