Goldcamp v. State

Florida Circuit Courts

Goldcamp v. State

40 Fla. Supp. 2d 95

CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida

DecidedJanuary 18, 1990

DocketCase No. 89-5336-AC-A

StatusPublished

This text of 40 Fla. Supp. 2d 95 (Goldcamp v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goldcamp v. State, 40 Fla. Supp. 2d 95 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The Defendant, Appellant, entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charged of Driving While License was Suspended or Revoked and announced the intention to appeal after the Trial Court denied Defen[96]*96dant’s Motion to Suppress the Evidence supporting the charged obtained in the “Stop and Frisk” search under §901.151, Florida Statutes, by Deputy Sheriff Barker of the Brevard County Sheriffs Office. The fact pattern facing Deputy Barker reflected the Defendant driving his pickup truck down a marl road in Port Canaveral at 8:20 p.m. on December 21, 1988. The pickup truck was empty except for a cooler in the back. Defendant turned around and headed back up the road when he was stopped and found to have no proper Driver’s License.

As a matter of law, the circumstances fall short of justifying any founded suspicion that the Defendant had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a criminal offense. Coladonato v State, 348 So.2d 326 (Fla. 1977); State v Hoover, 520 So.2d 686 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Abraham v State, 532 So.2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); and McLeod v State, 491 So.2d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

The Order Denying the Motion to Suppress is reversed, and the cause remanded to the Trial Court to discharge the Defendant from the subject charges.

Judges Edward M. Jackson, Jere E. Lober and John Dean Moxley, Jr., concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

The Defendant, Appellant, entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charged of Driving While License was Suspended or Revoked and announced the intention to appeal after the Trial Court denied Defen[96]*96dant’s Motion to Suppress the Evidence supporting the charged obtained in the “Stop and Frisk” search under §901.151, Florida Statutes, by Deputy Sheriff Barker of the Brevard County Sheriffs Office. The fact pattern facing Deputy Barker reflected the Defendant driving his pickup truck down a marl road in Port Canaveral at 8:20 p.m. on December 21, 1988. The pickup truck was empty except for a cooler in the back. Defendant turned around and headed back up the road when he was stopped and found to have no proper Driver’s License.

As a matter of law, the circumstances fall short of justifying any founded suspicion that the Defendant had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a criminal offense. Coladonato v State, 348 So.2d 326 (Fla. 1977); State v Hoover, 520 So.2d 686 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Abraham v State, 532 So.2d 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); and McLeod v State, 491 So.2d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

The Order Denying the Motion to Suppress is reversed, and the cause remanded to the Trial Court to discharge the Defendant from the subject charges.

Judges Edward M. Jackson, Jere E. Lober and John Dean Moxley, Jr., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 Fla. Supp. 2d 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldcamp-v-state-flacirct-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack