ABRAHAM PARKER, 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.
Abraham Parker was charged with resisting a police officer under Florida Statute § 843.01. Parker argued the officer lacked jurisdiction to conduct an investigation outside city limits, but the court held that municipal officers may lawfully investigate outside their territorial jurisdiction even though they cannot arrest outside their jurisdiction, and therefore the conviction was proper.
A municipal police officer may conduct a lawful investigation outside his territorial jurisdiction even though he is not authorized to arrest outside his jurisdiction unless in hot pursuit. When an individual obstructs an officer engaged in the lawful execution of a legal duty of investigation, a violation of § 843.01 is committed.
[1] A municipal police officer may lawfully conduct an investigation outside of his territorial jurisdiction.
[2] Interfering with a police officer engaged in the lawful execution of a legal duty, such as conducting an investigation, constitutes a violation of Florida Statute Section…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“A municipal police officer, although not authorized to arrest outside his jurisdiction unless such arrest is in "hot pursuit", Section 901.25, Florida Statutes (1975), may conduct a lawful investigation outside his territorial jurisdiction.”
Establishes the core holding that investigatory authority extends beyond territorial jurisdiction even though arrest authority does not.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOfficer Knowles, a Pensacola city police officer, was investigating the sale of stolen property within the city. During his investigation, Knowles det…
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 Lawful Execution Of A Legal Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
An information alleged that appellant violated Section 843.01, Florida Statutes (1975) by resisting, obstructing or opposing a municipal police officer in the lawful execution of a legal duty by offering or doing violence to such officer. Appellant contends his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted because the evidence did not establish that the officer was engaged in the lawful execution of his legal duty since the municipal officer was outside his territorial jurisdiction at the time of the incident. We disagree.
The evidence revealed that Officer Knowles, a Pensacola city police officer, was involved in an investigation concerning the sale of stolen property within the city. In the course of his investigation, Knowles detained several individuals outside the city limits for interrogation. At that time, appellant approached the scene and commenced to interfere with the investigation. Knowles identified himself as a city police officer. Appellant continued obstructing.
We think the evidence was sufficient to establish that Officer Knowles was engaged in the lawful execution of a legal duty at the time of the incident. A municipal police officer, although not authorized to arrest outside his jurisdiction unless such arrest is in “hot pursuit”, Section 901.25, Florida Statutes (1975), may conduct a lawful investigation outside his territorial jurisdiction. Where an individual with violence obstructs an officer, engaged in the lawful execution of a legal duty, viz — that of investigation, a violation of Section 843.01 has been committed.
The judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.
McCORD, C. J., and BOYER and MILLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Phoenix, 428 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)…on if the subject matter of the investigation originated in their own jurisdiction. Goodman v. State, 399 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); State v. Chapman, 376 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 386 So. 2d 642 (Fla.1980); Parker v. State, 362 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), cert. denied, 373 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1979); Brenner v. State, 337 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 348 So. 2d 944 (Fla.1977). Nonetheless, the principle espoused in these cases is subject to the proviso set forth in th…
-
State v. Chapman, 376 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…nd frisk statute, Section 901.151, Florida Statutes (1977), apply to a municipal officer outside his jurisdiction and not in “hot pursuit”. A municipal officer may conduct a lawful investigation outside his territorial jurisdiction, Parker v. State, 362 So. 2d 1033 (Fla.1st DCA 1978), but the subject matter of the investigation must have originated in his own jurisdiction. Brenner v. State, supra. An off-duty municipal police officer outside his jurisdiction has no right of arrest other than as a private citi…
-
Wilson v. State, 403 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…estigations outside the city limits. Such investigations are, however, limited to those situations where the subject matter of the investigation originated inside the city limits, State v. Chapman, 376 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Parker v. State, 362 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Fourth, case law supports the position that private citizens may investigate criminal activity. State v. Shipman, 370 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). Thus, a municipal police officer acting as a private citizen may conduct inve…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence