Ralston v. Florida Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ralston v. Florida Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

419 So. 2d 780, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21237

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 23, 1982

DocketNo. AK-385

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 419 So. 2d 780 (Ralston v. Florida Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services) 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

Ralston v. Florida Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 419 So. 2d 780, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21237 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court adjudicating two of appellant’s minor children dependents. The sole issue which warrants summary discussion pertains to appellant’s contention that the court erred in denying her motion to suppress photographs which were seized during a search conducted pursuant to a search warrant for a handgun. The basis of that denial was the court’s conclusion that Florida’s constitutionally embodied exclusionary rule does not apply in dependency proceedings. Although we recognize that the issue raised is one of first impression, it need not be resolved herein because we find that the search of which appellant complains was not an unreasonable one requiring invocation of the rule, if applicable. Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

McCORD, BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court adjudicating two of appellant’s minor children dependents. The sole issue which warrants summary discussion pertains to appellant’s contention that the court erred in denying her motion to suppress photographs which were seized during a search conducted pursuant to a search warrant for a handgun. The basis of that denial was the court’s conclusion that Florida’s constitutionally embodied exclusionary rule does not apply in dependency proceedings. Although we recognize that the issue raised is one of first impression, it need not be resolved herein because we find that the search of which appellant complains was not an unreasonable one requiring invocation of the rule, if applicable. Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

McCORD, BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

419 So. 2d 780, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralston-v-florida-department-of-health-rehabilitative-services-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack