THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLIE WILLIAMS, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1974-11-19
No. 74-573
Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.
303 So. 2d 74 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1974) Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida's Third District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's suppression of evidence obtained during an arrest by a municipal police officer on an interstate highway. The court held that municipal police officers are authorized to enforce state traffic laws within their municipal boundaries, even on interstate highways.


Holding

A municipal police officer is specifically authorized to enforce traffic laws within the confines of a municipality, including interstate highways within its geographical limits. Section 316.006 vests exclusive jurisdiction in the State only for establishing traffic control devices, speed limits, and signs, not for enforcement.


Headnotes

[1] A municipal police officer is authorized to enforce state traffic laws within the municipality's geographical limits.

[2] A statute vesting jurisdiction in the Department of Transportation for establishing traffic control devices does not divest municipal police officers of the authority to…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“a municipal police officer is specifically authorized to enforce the traffic laws within the confines of a municipality”

Establishes the core holding regarding municipal police authority

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A municipal police officer arrested Charlie Williams for a traffic violation on an interstate highway within the officer's municipality. The trial cou…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

By this interlocutory appeal, pursuant to § 924.071(1), Fla.Stat., we are called upon to review the propriety of a trial court’s order suppressing certain evidence obtained following what the trial court found to be an illegal arrest. The pivotal question is whether or not a municipal police officer has a right to arrest a motor vehicle operator for violations of the State traffic code occurring on an interstate highway within the geographical limits of the municipality.

We hold that pursuant to § 316.-016(3) (a)-, Fla.Stat.1 a municipal police officer is specifically authorized to enforce the traffic laws within the confines of a municipality. The appellee urges that § 316.006, Fla.Stat.2 divests the municipality of any such power. However, we do not agree; this latter section vests exclusive jurisdiction in the State, through the Department of Transportation, for the establishment of traffic control devices, speed limits, signs, etc. By the very title to this section, this does not relate to enforcement. It is understandable that the Legislature would place the exclusive jurisdiction for fixing speed limits, signs, and traffic control devices in one authority in order that the requirements on a given road would be uniform, but it is also understandable that the Legislature would permit the enforcement of these requirements by any lawful law enforcement officer. Therefore, for the reasons above stated, the order here under review is hereby reversed and remanded to the trial court.

Reversed and remanded.

. “§ 316.016 Enforcement. — The enforcement of the traffic laws of this state is vested as follows:

* * * * *

“(3) Municipalities.—

“(a) The police department of each chartered municipality shall enforce the traffic laws of this state on all the streets and highways thereof and elsewhere throughout the municipality wherever the public has the right to travel by motor vehicle. However, nothing in this chapter shall affect any law, general, special, or otherwise, in effect on January 1, 1972, relating to ‘hot pursuit’ without the boundaries of the municipality.”

. “§ 316.006 Jurisdiction. — Jurisdiction to control traffic is vested as follows:

“(1) State. — The department of transportation shall have all original jurisdiction over all state roads throughout this state, including those within the grounds of all state institutions and the boundaries of all dedicated state parks, and may place and maintain such traffic control devices which conform to its manual and specifications upon all such highways as it shall deem necessary to indicate and to carry out the provisions of this chapter or to regulate, warn, or guide traffic.”

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Wright v. State, 471 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
    …ing the motor vehicle laws of this state, had the authority, even the duty, to investigate why an apparently unoccupied vehicle was parked on the roadway with its license tag obscured, in violation of a motor vehicle statute.2 See State v. Williams, 303 So. 2d 74, 75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), dismissed, 314 So. 2d 591 (Fla.1975) (municipal police officer is specifically authorized to enforce traffic laws within the confines of municipality). Once the officer ascertained that the vehicle was occupied, the de minimi…
  • Williams v. State, 314 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 1975)
    …Case dismissed. 303 So. 2d 74. ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, OVERTON and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.…
  • Rodriguez v. State, 407 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
    …Affirmed. Carter v. State, 370 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Ingraham v. State, 364 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Phillips v. State, 360 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); State v. Francois, 355 So. 2d 127 (Fla.3d DCA 1978); State v. Williams, 303 So. 2d 74 (Fla.3d DCA 1974); Williams v. State, 294 So. 2d 37 (Fla.3d DCA 1974).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw