LaChance v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

LaChance v. State

376 So. 2d 932, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15824

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 15, 1979

DocketNo. 77-1919

StatusPublished

This text of 376 So. 2d 932 (LaChance 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

LaChance v. State, 376 So. 2d 932, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15824 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinions

BERANEK, Judge.

Defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress contending basically that the affidavit supporting a search warrant was inadequate and contained untrue statements.

We have examined the affidavit and application for a search warrant here under attack and while it is no model document, we believe it sufficiently states probable cause. As the Supreme Court of the United States has said, “A policeman’s affidavit ‘should not be judged as an entry in an essay contest,’ . . .We conclude that the affidavit in the present case contains an ample factual basis for believing the informant.” United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 579, 91 S.Ct. 2075, 2080, 29 L.Ed.2d 723 (1971).

We further do not agree with appellant’s arguments that the policeman’s affi[933]*933davit contained proven untruths, tended examination the officer sufficiently explained his word usage so that his credibility was not destroyed and the trial court made no finding of untruthfulness. The transcript of the hearing shows the court in fact believed the testimony of the officer. The judgment below is affirmed. In ex-

AFFIRMED.

LETTS, J., concurs. DAUKSCH, J., dissents.

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

BERANEK, Judge.

Defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress contending basically that the affidavit supporting a search warrant was inadequate and contained untrue statements.

We have examined the affidavit and application for a search warrant here under attack and while it is no model document, we believe it sufficiently states probable cause. As the Supreme Court of the United States has said, “A policeman’s affidavit ‘should not be judged as an entry in an essay contest,’ . . .We conclude that the affidavit in the present case contains an ample factual basis for believing the informant.” United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 579, 91 S.Ct. 2075, 2080, 29 L.Ed.2d 723 (1971).

We further do not agree with appellant’s arguments that the policeman’s affi[933]*933davit contained proven untruths, tended examination the officer sufficiently explained his word usage so that his credibility was not destroyed and the trial court made no finding of untruthfulness. The transcript of the hearing shows the court in fact believed the testimony of the officer. The judgment below is affirmed. In ex-

AFFIRMED.

LETTS, J., concurs. DAUKSCH, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

376 So. 2d 932, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lachance-v-state-fladistctapp-1979.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack