Conner v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Conner v. State

349 So. 2d 709

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 17, 1977

DocketNo. FF-115

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 349 So. 2d 709 (Conner v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Conner v. State, 349 So. 2d 709 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, Judge.

Conner appeals from a probationary sentence following the trial court’s acceptance of his plea of nolo contendere to a charge of possession of marijuana, reserving Conner’s right on appeal to complain of the court’s order denying his motion to suppress as evidence the marijuana seized on his person.

Conner attracted the attention of the arresting officer while walking one morning, apparently aimlessly, through an alley of a commercial area. His manner aroused the officer’s suspicion. Then the officer observed him “lift his hat and take something out of it and bend down and put it in his shoe and then walk off.” The officer testified that “the only thing I could think of he’d be putting down there was a weapon” and said “I don’t really know that it was a knife or gun or ax or what.” The officer approached, commanded Conner to remove his shoe, and arrested him for possession 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 insufficient predicate for the search. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968).

The sentence is VACATED and Conner is DISCHARGED.

McCORD, C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.

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

SMITH, Judge.

Conner appeals from a probationary sentence following the trial court’s acceptance of his plea of nolo contendere to a charge of possession of marijuana, reserving Conner’s right on appeal to complain of the court’s order denying his motion to suppress as evidence the marijuana seized on his person.

Conner attracted the attention of the arresting officer while walking one morning, apparently aimlessly, through an alley of a commercial area. His manner aroused the officer’s suspicion. Then the officer observed him “lift his hat and take something out of it and bend down and put it in his shoe and then walk off.” The officer testified that “the only thing I could think of he’d be putting down there was a weapon” and said “I don’t really know that it was a knife or gun or ax or what.” The officer approached, commanded Conner to remove his shoe, and arrested him for possession 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 insufficient predicate for the search. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968).

The sentence is VACATED and Conner is DISCHARGED.

McCORD, C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

349 So. 2d 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conner-v-state-fladistctapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack