State v. Moore
This text of 424 So. 2d 882 (State v. Moore) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Stephen Richard MOORE, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
*883 Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Lawrence A. Kaden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellant.
Larry G. Turner and Thomas W. Kurrus, Gainesville, for appellee.
JOANOS, Judge.
The State of Florida appeals a non-final order granting Moore's motion to suppress evidence based upon a finding that section 812.055, Florida Statutes (1981), is unconstitutional. We agree with the state's position and reverse.
We concur in the well-reasoned analysis of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Bludworth v. Arcuri, 416 So.2d 882 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), where the constitutionality of Section 812.055, Florida Statutes (1981), was upheld. Section 812.055, Florida Statutes (1981), is limited to specified commercial establishments (here, a motor vehicle repair shop) and to execution during normal business hours, so there is no unlawful infringement of Moore's private property as he contends. Moore is on notice by the statute's clear language and the searching officer does not have unbridled discretion, as the statute specifically limits the purpose of the inspection.
Accordingly, the trial court's order is REVERSED.
SHAW and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
424 So. 2d 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-moore-fladistctapp-1982.