THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
BENJAMIN BETHEL CRUM, 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 Florida appellate court reversed a suppression order, holding that a Miami Beach police officer acting undercover outside his jurisdiction could lawfully initiate a drug investigation and arrest because he was functioning as a private citizen rather than exercising police authority.
A police officer acting undercover outside his jurisdiction has the authority to seize evidence, obtain an arrest warrant, and effect an arrest if he is not holding himself out as a police officer and is thus functioning as a private citizen with the right to arrest for felonies committed in his presence.
[1] A law enforcement officer acting undercover and representing themselves as a private citizen is in the same legal position as a private citizen for the purpose of effecti…
[2] A police officer's actions outside their jurisdictional limits may be sustained if they are acting as a private citizen.
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“"Under the color of office" refers to a law enforcement officer holding himself out as a police officer by either wearing his uniform or in some other manner identifying himself as such.”
Defines the key legal standard for determining whether an officer is acting in an official capacity or as a private citizen
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMiami Beach police officer Richard Barreto, acting undercover and not identifying himself as a police officer, met with defendant Benjamin Crum in the…
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 Acting Under Color Of Office cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State of Florida takes this interlocutory appeal to review an order granting defendant’s motion to suppress on the grounds that a City of Miami Beach officer is without jurisdiction to conduct an investigation and effect an arrest in the City of Miami. The salient facts are as follows:
In January 1975 Richard Barreto, a Miami Beach police officer, acting undercover, initiated a drug investigation and, through an introduction by an informer, met with the defendant, Benjamin Crum, in the City of Miami for the purpose of making a purchase of contraband. After officer Barreto purchased the contraband from the defendant, he went to the State Attorney’s office, signed an affidavit for the defendant’s arrest, obtained an arrest warrant, and, accompanied by a City of Miami police officer, served the warrant on the defendant. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence on the grounds that officer Barreto was without jurisdiction to effect the arrest in that the meetings with defendant, the sale of the contraband, and the arrest occurred within the City of Miami.
It is undisputed that officer Barreto left his jurisdiction and, therefore, his actions only can be sustained, if at all, as the actions of a private citizen who has the right to arrest a person who commits a felony in his (or her) presence. Whether officer Barreto’s actions are sustainable as a private citizen must be determined by ascertaining whether officer Barreto was acting “under color of bis office” at the time of the contraband purchase and subsequent arrest. See Collins v. State, Fla.App.1962, 143 So. 2d 700, 703.
“Under the color of office” refers to a law enforcement officer holding himself out as a police officer by either wearing his uniform or in some other manner identifying himself as such. See 1971 Att'y Gen.Ann.Rep. 111.
In the case sub judice, officer Barreto was not wearing a uniform. Rather, he was working “undercover” and representing himself to be a private citizen at all times. Thus, we conclude that officer Barreto was substantially in the same position as any private citizen and had the authority to seize the evidence, go to the State Attorney’s office, sign an affidavit for the defendant’s arrest, obtain an arrest warrant, and effect an arrest.
The order granting the motion to suppress is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Phoenix v. State, 455 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1984)…sdictional limitations on law enforcement officials’ ability to make arrests, neither should they have any greater power of arrest outside their jurisdiction than private citizens. Schacter v. State, 338 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); State v. Crum, 323 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). To prevent law enforcement officials from misusing the powers of their office in making a citizen’s arrest, the courts of this state have held that law enforcement officials may not make a citizen’s arrest under the color of the…
-
State v. Shipman, 370 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…was actually guilty of the felony. (Emphasis added; citations omitted) (Id. at 703) See also State v. Williams, 366 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 2d DCA, opinion issued January 10, 1979); State v. Jimerson, 330 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); and State v. Crum, 323 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). However, Puleo’s actions would not be sustainable as those of a private citizen if Puleo was acting “under color of his office” at the time he observed the felonious conduct which resulted in the subsequent arrest. State v. Crum,…
-
State v. Chapman, 376 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…felony being committed during his detention of the defendant. Further, we might determine whether Officer Infante’s actions are sustainable by ascertaining whether he was acting “under color of his office” at the time of the arrest. State v. Crum, 323 So. 2d 673 (Fla.3d DCA 1976). Admittedly, upon confronting the defendant, he identified himself as a police officer, displayed his badge, ordered defendant to place the tape deck on the ground, subjected defendant to a pat-down, obtained identification from hi…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Collins v. State, 143 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)