State v. Gillum

429 So. 2d 1367, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20755
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Gillum. Read the opinion of the Court — 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18915
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 22, 1983·No. No. 82-1995·Published

Opinion

DANAHY, Judge.

The state contends that the trial judge erred in granting the appellant’s motion to suppress Dilaudid pills as evidence against him. We agree.

In State v. Gillum, 428 So.2d 755, No. 82-1994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), we reversed the trial judge’s order granting the motion [1368]*1368of the appellant’s wife to suppress the same Dilaudid pills discovered under the same circumstances as those present here. For the reasons stated in that opinion, we find that there was probable cause for the search which uncovered this evidence.

REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BOARDMAN, A.C.J., and GRIMES, J., concur.

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

State v. Gillum, 429 So. 2d 1367, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20755 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

429 So. 2d 1367 (State v. Gillum) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Gillum
428 So. 2d 755 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)