Lovett v. State

675 So. 2d 1054, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7159, 1996 WL 372524
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lovett v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11100
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 5, 1996·No. Case No. 95-2638·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See State v. Raulerson, 403 So.2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (holding that marijuana can be identified by its odor and surrounding circumstances occurring when it was seized); and Turner v. State, 388 So.2d 254, 257 (Fla. 1st DCA), dismissed, 394 So.2d 1154 (Fla.1980) (holding that marijuana may be identified by its appearance and its smell).

DAUKSCH, GRIFFIN, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

Lovett v. State, 675 So. 2d 1054, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 7159, 1996 WL 372524 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

675 So. 2d 1054 (Lovett v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Turner v. State
388 So. 2d 254 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
State v. Raulerson
403 So. 2d 1102 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)