State v. Fisher

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Fisher

416 So. 2d 871, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28619

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 13, 1982

DocketNo. 81-2411

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 416 So. 2d 871 (State v. Fisher) 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. Fisher, 416 So. 2d 871, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28619 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Relying upon our decision in Casal v. State, 375 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), the trial court granted the defendant’s motion to suppress the marijuana found aboard his vessel by Marine Patrol officers because they had no probable cause or founded suspicion of illegal activity so as to justify the initial stop. The supreme court’s subsequent disapproval and reversal of this conclusion and its contrary holding in State v. Casal, 410 So.2d 152 (Fla.1982) that “spot checks of motorboats are not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment,” 410 So.2d at 155, requires reversal of that order.

Since we are not empowered in this state appeal to consider the appellee’s claims that the suppression should be affirmed on other grounds which the trial court did not reach or pass upon below, State v. Roberts, 415 So.2d 796, n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), we remand for consideration of these alternative contentions and for further proceedings thereafter which are consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

Relying upon our decision in Casal v. State, 375 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), the trial court granted the defendant’s motion to suppress the marijuana found aboard his vessel by Marine Patrol officers because they had no probable cause or founded suspicion of illegal activity so as to justify the initial stop. The supreme court’s subsequent disapproval and reversal of this conclusion and its contrary holding in State v. Casal, 410 So.2d 152 (Fla.1982) that “spot checks of motorboats are not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment,” 410 So.2d at 155, requires reversal of that order.

Since we are not empowered in this state appeal to consider the appellee’s claims that the suppression should be affirmed on other grounds which the trial court did not reach or pass upon below, State v. Roberts, 415 So.2d 796, n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), we remand for consideration of these alternative contentions and for further proceedings thereafter which are consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

416 So. 2d 871, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 28619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-fisher-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack