B.C. v. State

449 So. 2d 955, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12970
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 8, 1984·No. No. 83-1352·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The finding of delinquency and disposition under review is affirmed upon a holding that the trial court properly denied the juvenile’s pretrial motion to suppress the cannabis seized by police from the juvenile’s person because: (a) the arresting officer properly stopped the automobile in which the juvenile was riding based on a reasonable belief that the juvenile and his companions were absent from school without authorization, § 39.401(l)(e), Fla.Stat. (1983), (b) the juvenile and his companions were thereupon properly ordered out of the automobile by the arresting officer, Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330, 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977); and (c) the cannabis was thereafter properly seized by the arresting officer as it was observed in plain sight in a clear plastic bag in the front pocket area of the juvenile’s jacket. Neary v. State, 384 So.2d 881, 884 (Fla. 1980); Gibson v. State, 368 So.2d 667 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

B.C. v. State, 449 So. 2d 955, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12970 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

449 So. 2d 955 (B.C. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. A.J.
720 So. 2d 1156 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Mattox v. State
41 Fla. Supp. 2d 40 (Florida Circuit Courts, 1990)
State v. Barcenas
559 So. 2d 70 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)