State v. Famularo

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Famularo

532 So. 2d 45, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2234, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4287, 1988 WL 98585

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 28, 1988

DocketNos. 87-0693, 87-0694

StatusPublished

This text of 532 So. 2d 45 (State v. Famularo) 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

State v. Famularo, 532 So. 2d 45, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2234, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4287, 1988 WL 98585 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinions

DOWNEY, Judge.

The state seeks reversal of two non-final orders finding that appellees had standing to attack the validity of a search warrant and suppressing the evidence seized thereunder.

The apartment searched was leased by a person named Yawt, who allowed a friend, Farlin, to stay there at times. Yawt also rented a bedroom to appellees, which they used during the daytime only (allegedly for gambling purposes). In a prior case, the trial court, presided over by another judge, granted a motion to suppress the evidence discovered via the search warrant on the grounds that the affidavit upon which it was issued was insufficient. This court affirmed that decision.

In these cases appellees also moved to suppress the evidence on the same grounds —insufficiency of the affidavit — and the motion was granted by a different trial judge. The court also found that appellees herein had standing to attack the warrant based upon the evidence adduced.

Our review of the record presented to the trial court convinces us that there is substantial competent evidence to support the trial judge's findings. Accordingly, we affirm the orders appealed from.

WALDEN, J., concurs. STONE, J., dissents with opinion.

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