Ramos v. State

394 So. 2d 460, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19542
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ramos v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 413 So. 2d 1302
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 10, 1981·No. No. TT-66·Published

Opinion

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Judge.

Appealing from judgments and sentences for marijuana marketing offenses, Ramos urges that evidence taken against him by telephone wiretap should have been suppressed on the ground that the affidavit on which the intercept order was issued was insufficient to show probable cause to believe Ramos was engaged in such offenses by use of the specified telephone. On review of the lengthy affidavit, disregarding recited evidence which was based on another intercept, since found in other proceedings to be unwarranted, we find that the affidavit as a whole contains sufficient competent material, particularly in the affi-[461]*461ant’s eye-witness recitals of paragraph E, to support the intercept order.

AFFIRMED.

MILLS, C. J., and WENTWORTH, J., concur.

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

Ramos v. State, 394 So. 2d 460, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19542 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

394 So. 2d 460 (Ramos v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.