Jones v. State

775 So. 2d 354, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13719, 2000 WL 1580451
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jones v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 708 So. 2d 337
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 25, 2000·No. No. 2D99-3721·Published

Opinion

FULMER, Judge.

Syrterrek Jones appeals from his convictions for obstructing an officer with vio[355]*355lence and carrying a concealed weapon. We affirm.

Jones first challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence. We affirm the trial court’s ruling on this motion because the State presented sufficient evidence by which the trial court could find that the officer had a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, justifying a detention of Jones. See Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 120 S.Ct. 673, 674, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000) (“[T]he reasonable suspicion determination must be based on commonsense judgments and inferences about human behavior.”).

Jones also argues that he should be permitted to withdraw his no contest plea. However, he did not move to withdraw his plea in the trial court, and therefore, did not properly preserve this issue for review.

Affirmed.

BLUE, A.C.J., and SALCINES, J., Concur.

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

Jones v. State, 775 So. 2d 354, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13719, 2000 WL 1580451 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

775 So. 2d 354 (Jones v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Illinois v. Wardlow
528 U.S. 119 (Supreme Court, 2000)