Righter v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Righter v. State

406 So. 2d 509, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21533

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 3, 1981·No. No. 80-2100·Published

Opinion

FERGUSON, Judge.

There was no valid search and seizure claim as to search of a business premise where consent to search was given by a co-owner of the business and the search was a reasonable one conducted during business hours in an area open to the public. Cf. Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731, 89 S.Ct. 1420, 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969). Rivers v. State, 226 So.2d 337 (Fla.1969). We find it unnecessary to reach the remaining issue in this appeal, i. e., whether Section 812.055, Florida Statutes (1979) which allows any law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to inspect a motor vehicle repair shop during normal business hours for the purpose of locating stolen vehicles violates constitutional safeguards against unreasonable searches.

Affirmed.

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

FERGUSON, Judge.

There was no valid search and seizure claim as to search of a business premise where consent to search was given by a co-owner of the business and the search was a reasonable one conducted during business hours in an area open to the public. Cf. Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731, 89 S.Ct. 1420, 22 L.Ed.2d 684 (1969). Rivers v. State, 226 So.2d 337 (Fla.1969). We find it unnecessary to reach the remaining issue in this appeal, i. e., whether Section 812.055, Florida Statutes (1979) which allows any law enforcement officer, without a warrant, to inspect a motor vehicle repair shop during normal business hours for the purpose of locating stolen vehicles violates constitutional safeguards against unreasonable searches.

Affirmed.

Righter v. State, 406 So. 2d 509, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21533 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

406 So. 2d 509 (Righter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related