J.S. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

J.S. v. State

644 So. 2d 1042, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11363, 1994 WL 656752

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in J.S. v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 7973 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 23, 1994·No. No. 92-216·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

J.S., a juvenile, appeals from the final order adjudicating him delinquent. We reverse.

The juvenile contends that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence where the evidence seized was the product of an illegal stop and frisk. We agree.

We find that the record does not contain sufficient specific and articulable facts that, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably justify the stop. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Therefore, the juvenile’s motion to suppress evidence should have been granted below.

Accordingly, we reverse.

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

PER CURIAM.

J.S., a juvenile, appeals from the final order adjudicating him delinquent. We reverse.

The juvenile contends that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence where the evidence seized was the product of an illegal stop and frisk. We agree.

We find that the record does not contain sufficient specific and articulable facts that, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably justify the stop. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Therefore, the juvenile’s motion to suppress evidence should have been granted below.

Accordingly, we reverse.

J.S. v. State, 644 So. 2d 1042, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11363, 1994 WL 656752 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

644 So. 2d 1042 (J.S. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related