DEAN ALLEN BAKER, 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.
Baker appeals his conviction for carrying a concealed firearm, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a search. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the arresting officer had probable cause to stop Baker and properly conducted a frisk under Florida's stop and frisk statute.
The trial court did not err in denying the suppression motion. The officer had probable cause to detain Baker based on the reliable citizen report, and the search of Baker and his jacket was proper under Florida's stop and frisk statute (Section 901.151, Fla. Stat.). The weapon was lawfully seized.
[1] Probable cause for an arrest exists when a citizen complaint provides reliable information that a defendant is carrying a concealed firearm.
[2] A police officer may temporarily detain a person if circumstances reasonably indicate that the person is committing a criminal violation.
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“This information was reliable enough to constitute probable cause that defendant was carrying a concealed firearm.”
Establishes that the citizen's report provided sufficient basis for the officer's initial stop and detention.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA citizen reported to a police sergeant that Baker had shown him a pistol and was walking around downtown St. Augustine carrying it concealed. Upon re…
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 Stop And Frisk cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Appellant-defendant (Baker) appeals from a judgment adjudicating him guilty of carrying a concealed firearm and sentence of three years. The issue here is whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence on the ground of illegal search and arrest. The trial court did not err, and we affirm. After denial of his motion to suppress, defendant pled nolo contendere, was adjudicated guilty and sentenced. A review of the facts adduced at the hearing on the motion supports the findings of the trial court that probable cause existed for defendant’s arrest, and that the arresting officer complied with the requirements of the “stop and frisk law”, Section 901.151, Florida Statutes.
A citizen, who had just given defendant a ride in his automobile, complained to a Sergeant of the St. Augustine Police Department that defendant showed him a pistol that he was carrying, and defendant was at that moment walking around downtown St. Augustine with a concealed pistol. This information was reliable enough to constitute probable cause that defendant was carrying a concealed firearm. West v. State, 239 So. 2d 611 (Fla.App.1970).
Upon receiving this information, the police officer drove uptown where he saw defendant, previously known to him, walking around with a jacket over his arm. He parked his car, and defendant walked over and greeted him. The officer opened the car door and in getting out of it, his hand brushed a hard object in the jacket. He immediately snatched the jacket from defendant, threw it onto the front seat, and placed defendant against the car. He frisked defendant, found nothing on him, and placed him in the car. The officer then checked the defendant’s jacket where he found a pistol and box of shells. Defendant was charged with carrying a concealed firearm. These facts support an application of the “stop and frisk law”, supra. A police officer may temporarily detain a person under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the person is committing a violation of a criminal law, for the purpose of ascertaining the circumstances which led the officer to believe the person was violating a criminal law. Having been properly detained, if the officer has probable cause to believe the person is armed with a dangerous weapon which offers a threat to the safety of the officer or any other person, he may search the person to the extent necessary to disclose the presence of a weapon. If a weapon is found, it may be seized.
For the reasons set forth above, affirmed.
BOYER, C. J., and McCORD, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ingram v. State, 364 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)…. Mobley v. State, 335 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). . Wilson v. State, 324 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). . § 901.15(2), Fla.Stat. (1975); Whitley v. State, 349 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). . § 901.15(2), Fla.stat. (1975); Baker v. State, 316 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). . § 901.15(6), Fla.stat. (1975); Whitley v. State, supra; Bennett v. State, 344 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). . § 901.15(5), Fla.stat. (1975); Bennett v. State, supra. . Bailey v. State, 319 So. 2d 22 (Fla.1975); Tolavera v…
-
Phillips v. State, 360 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…r recognition of the detainee as one reported to be armed may justify a weapon search, although the original detention was not so informed. Ingram v. State, 264 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972), cert. denied, 271 So. 2d 141 (Fla.1972); Baker v. State, 316 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). See also McNamara v. State, 357 So. 2d 410 (Fla.1978). But none of those circumstances are present here. This search was unlawful and the fruits of it should be suppressed. Bennett v. State, 344 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); M…
-
Conner v. State, 349 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)…ion of the marijuana that was revealed. The record is barren of evidence that there was probable cause to believe Conner was “armed with a dangerous weapon which offers a threat to the safety of the officer or any other person . . . Baker v. State, 316 So. 2d 657, 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Perry v. State, 296 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). There was no probable cause to believe Conner was about to commit a crime. Even giving full credit to the genuineness of the officer’s suspicion, suspicion is an insufficie…
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
- Donahue L. West v. State, 239 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)