State v. Hernandez

898 So. 2d 1179, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 4635, 2005 WL 766493
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 6, 2005·No. No. 3D04-947·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

The state appeals from an order suppressing marijuana found in the appellees’ residence. Upon an acceptable view of the record, the court concluded that the contraband had been unconstitutionally discovered and then seized only when, without cognizable “exigent circumstances,” cf. State v. Riggs, 890 So.2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)(warrantless entry justified by founded concern for safety of occupants); Davis v. State, 834 So.2d 322 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)(warrantless entry justified by reasonable suspicion that home had been burglarized), an officer, who was in their rear yard solely to return a dog that had been running loose, decided to open and peer through a sliding glass door at the rear of the house. We agree and affirm. See State v. Adams, 378 So.2d 72 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Hornblower v. State, 351 So.2d 716 (Fla.1977); Olivera v. State, 315 So.2d 487 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 330 So.2d 21 (Fla.1976).

Affirmed.

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

State v. Hernandez, 898 So. 2d 1179, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 4635, 2005 WL 766493 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

898 So. 2d 1179 (State v. Hernandez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Glosser v. Vasquez
898 So. 2d 1179 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)