Gerstenberger v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gerstenberger v. State

667 So. 2d 1009, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1017, 1996 WL 61365

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 14, 1996

DocketNo. 95-00395

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 667 So. 2d 1009 (Gerstenberger 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

Gerstenberger v. State, 667 So. 2d 1009, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1017, 1996 WL 61365 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

QUINCE, Judge.

Susan L. Gerstenberger challenges the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress and the imposition of certain conditions of probation. We affirm on the suppression issue since the officers complied with the knock and announce requirements of section 933.09, Florida Statutes (1993). We reverse and strike the portion of probation condition eighteen concerning alcohol.

To the extent that condition eighteen prohibits possessing and consuming alcohol, prohibits frequenting places where alcohol is the main source of business and prohibits associating with persons who consume alcohol, it is a special condition of probation which was not orally pronounced at sentencing and is hereby stricken. Roberson v. State, 654 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Sheffield v. State, 651 So.2d 160 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Additionally, this condition is not related to the crimes of possession of cannabis and possession of methamphetamine. Richardson v. State, 620 So.2d 257 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

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

QUINCE, Judge.

Susan L. Gerstenberger challenges the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress and the imposition of certain conditions of probation. We affirm on the suppression issue since the officers complied with the knock and announce requirements of section 933.09, Florida Statutes (1993). We reverse and strike the portion of probation condition eighteen concerning alcohol.

To the extent that condition eighteen prohibits possessing and consuming alcohol, prohibits frequenting places where alcohol is the main source of business and prohibits associating with persons who consume alcohol, it is a special condition of probation which was not orally pronounced at sentencing and is hereby stricken. Roberson v. State, 654 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Sheffield v. State, 651 So.2d 160 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Additionally, this condition is not related to the crimes of possession of cannabis and possession of methamphetamine. Richardson v. State, 620 So.2d 257 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

667 So. 2d 1009, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1017, 1996 WL 61365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerstenberger-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack