G. B., A CHILD, 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.
A minor was cited for a motorcycle helmet violation and charged with resisting an officer. While in contempt proceedings, his legally parked car was impounded and searched, revealing marijuana. The court held that the impoundment and inventory search were unlawful because the state failed to establish any necessity for seizing the vehicle.
The inventory search was unlawful because it lacked the requisite justification. When a vehicle is challenged as unlawfully impounded, the state must demonstrate that it was illegally parked, a traffic nuisance, or that other factors necessitated custody. Here, the state failed to refute that the car was legally parked, thus failing to show necessity for impoundment.
[1] An inventory search is subject to the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.
[2] The reasonableness of an inventory search is determined by the totality of the circumstances.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“An inventory is a search within the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
Establishes that inventory searches are subject to Fourth Amendment constraints
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant, a minor, was stopped by police and cited for not wearing a protective face shield on his motorcycle helmet. He was also charged with resist…
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 Resisting An Officer Without Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
BOARDMAN, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant, a minor, was stopped by a police officer and cited for not wearing a protective face shield on his helmet while driving a motorcycle. He was also charged with resisting an officer without violence in violation of Section 843.02, Florida Statutes. While appearing before the municipal court on the traffic violation appellant was held in contempt of court and sentenced to ten days in detention. Appellant was taken into custody immediately. His car which was legally parked along side of the street outside of municipal court was impounded and its contents inventoried. The inventory revealed a quantity of marijuana which gave rise to a charge of felony possession of marijuana in violation of Section 893.13, Florida Statutes. Appellant moved to suppress the marijuana on the ground that it was seized pursuant to an unlawful impoundment and inventory search. After a hearing the trial court denied the motion. Appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to possession of marijuana reserving his right to appeal.1
An inventory is a search within the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. State v. Jenkins, 319 So. 2d 91 at 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Gagnon v. State, 212 So. 2d 337 (Fla.3d DCA 1968).
Whether an inventory search is reasonable depends upon the totality of the circumstances. Weed v. Wainwright, 325 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Godbee v. State, 224 So. 2d 441 at 443 (Fla.2d DCA 1969).
When appellant challenged the impoundment and inventory search of his vehicle the state was required to show that the vehicle was illegally parked or was in some other way a traffic nuisance or that there were other factors which made it necessary for the vehicle to be taken into custody. See Altman v. State, 335 So. 2d 626 at 629 (Fla.2d DCA 1976); Chuze v. State, 330 So. 2d 166 at 168 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Benton v. State, 329 So. 2d 385 at 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); In re 1972 Porsche 2 Dr., 307 So. 2d 451 (Fla.3d DCA 1975).
In this case appellant’s car was parked along the side of a street outside of the municipal court.
At the hearing on the motion to suppress appellant’s counsel stated that appellant’s car was legally parked when it was impounded. The state did not refute or contradict this statement. Having failed to do so it failed to show a necessity for the impoundment or subsequent search. The order denying the motion to suppress is reversed.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur. . Appellant was found guilty of resisting an officer. Pursuant to the disposition of the two charges appellant was placed on probation. The probation order appears to be applicable to both charges. In light of our holding as to the motion to suppress we remand to the trial court for resentencing on the charge of resisting an officer without violence.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. McLAUGHLIN, 454 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…x v. Williams. REVERSED and REMANDED. DAUKSCH and SHARP, JJ., concur. .See Lovett v. State, 403 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Hicks v. State, 398 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Agnew v. State, 376 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); G.B. v. State, 339 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); Godbee v. State, 224 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Tolbert v. State, 348 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). . Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752, 89 S.Ct. 2034, 23 L.Ed.2d 685 (1969). . Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct.…
-
Fields v. State, 369 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…ircumstances, held that the inventory search was not pretextual. We agree and the judgment below is, accordingly, AFFIRMED. BOYER, Acting C. J., and SMITH, J., concur. . 329 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). . 224 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1969). . 339 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1976). . 347 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1977). . 335 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1976). . 319 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). . 413 U.S. 433, 93 S.Ct. 2523, 37 L.Ed.2d 706 (1973).…
-
Granville v. State, 348 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977)…conducted there must be some necessity for impounding it. Altman v. State, 335 So. 2d 626 (Fla.2d DCA 1976). When a vehicle is legally parked some justification for impoundment other than the fact that it is unattended must be shown. G. B. v. State, 339 So. 2d 696 (Fla.2d DCA 1976). Here there was no justification for impounding the car. The vehicle was not abandoned or illegally parked, as in Godbee v. State, 224 So. 2d 441 (Fla.2d DCA 1969); nor would it otherwise have had to be left on the highway, as in U…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Adler v. Copa Corp., 212 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Felda Douglas Godbee v. State, 224 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- State v. Jenkins, 319 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- Commodore Plaza AT Century 21 Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Schwartz, 307 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Fredric Winton Altman v. State, 335 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Chuze v. State, 330 So. 2d 166 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)
- Weed v. Louie L. Wainwright, 325 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- Benton v. State, 329 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)