State v. Brady

Supreme Court of Florida

State v. Brady

466 So. 2d 1064, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 139, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3215

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedFebruary 28, 1985

DocketNo. 59054

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 466 So. 2d 1064 (State v. Brady) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Brady, 466 So. 2d 1064, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 139, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3215 (Fla. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

ADKINS, Justice.

This case is before us on remand from the United States Supreme Court following its decision on certiorari review of our earlier judgment in this case, reported as State v. Brady, 406 So.2d 1093 (Fla.1981) approving 379 So.2d 1294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). The Supreme Court vacated the prior judgment of this Court, and ordered that this cause be remanded to us for further consideration in light of Oliver v. United States, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 1735, 80 L.Ed.2d 214 (1984); Florida v. Brady, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 2380, 81 L.Ed.2d 339 (1984).

In accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Oliver, we hold that warrantless “open field” searches are proper, and that evidence received as a result thereof should [1065]*1065not be suppressed. We remand this case to the district court with instructions to remand the same to the trial court for pro-eeedings not inconsistent with this opinion,

It is so ordered.

BOYD, C.J., and OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDonald, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ„ concur.

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

ADKINS, Justice.

This case is before us on remand from the United States Supreme Court following its decision on certiorari review of our earlier judgment in this case, reported as State v. Brady, 406 So.2d 1093 (Fla.1981) approving 379 So.2d 1294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). The Supreme Court vacated the prior judgment of this Court, and ordered that this cause be remanded to us for further consideration in light of Oliver v. United States, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 1735, 80 L.Ed.2d 214 (1984); Florida v. Brady, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 2380, 81 L.Ed.2d 339 (1984).

In accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Oliver, we hold that warrantless “open field” searches are proper, and that evidence received as a result thereof should [1065]*1065not be suppressed. We remand this case to the district court with instructions to remand the same to the trial court for pro-eeedings not inconsistent with this opinion,

It is so ordered.

BOYD, C.J., and OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDonald, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

466 So. 2d 1064, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 139, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-brady-fla-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack