Mosier v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mosier v. State

415 So. 2d 771, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 20115

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 25, 1982

DocketNo. 81-1607

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 415 So. 2d 771 (Mosier 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

Mosier v. State, 415 So. 2d 771, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 20115 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal involves events subsequent to remand in State v. Mosier, 392 So.2d 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). In that case, the court held:

We vacate the order appealed and remand for an evidentiary determination of whether or not the suitcase was effectively detained because of state action pertaining to the officer’s investigation. If so, then the motion to suppress should be granted; if the suitcase was not seized prior to Dewey’s sniff, then the motion should be denied.

State v. Mosier, supra.

Pursuant to our mandate, the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and found that the suitcase in question was not detained because of state action. Consistent with our mandate, the trial court then denied the motion to suppress. Thereafter, the defendant entered a plea of nolo con-tendere, reserving his right to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress.

We have examined the record in detail and conclude that the trial court’s finding of “no state action” is supported by uncon-troverted evidence. The judgment and sentence are, accordingly, affirmed.

Affirmed.

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