State v. Moreno

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Moreno

558 So. 2d 470, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1494, 1990 WL 26682

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 13, 1990

DocketNo. 89-2728

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 558 So. 2d 470 (State v. Moreno) 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. Moreno, 558 So. 2d 470, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1494, 1990 WL 26682 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state petitions for writ of common law certiorari to review an order of the Appellate Division, Circuit Court, of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, affirming an order of the county court which granted a motion to suppress.

A Hialeah police officer was the only witness who testified before the county judge and plainly detailed the defendant’s alleged violation of sections 316.193 and 316.1925, Florida Statutes (1987). The officer’s testimony was unrebutted, uncontra-dicted, and unimpeached. The contraband that was seized flowed as an incident to the defendant’s arrest. Consequently, the county court impermissibly granted the defendant’s motion to suppress and the Circuit Court Appellate Division committed plain error in affirming that ruling. See State v. Fernandez, 526 So.2d 192 (Fla. 3d DCA), cause dismissed, 531 So.2d 1352 (Fla.1988), and cases cited therein.

For the foregoing reasons, certiorari is granted and the decision of the Circuit Court Appellate Division affirming the erroneous suppression order is quashed with directions to reinstate.

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

The state petitions for writ of common law certiorari to review an order of the Appellate Division, Circuit Court, of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, affirming an order of the county court which granted a motion to suppress.

A Hialeah police officer was the only witness who testified before the county judge and plainly detailed the defendant’s alleged violation of sections 316.193 and 316.1925, Florida Statutes (1987). The officer’s testimony was unrebutted, uncontra-dicted, and unimpeached. The contraband that was seized flowed as an incident to the defendant’s arrest. Consequently, the county court impermissibly granted the defendant’s motion to suppress and the Circuit Court Appellate Division committed plain error in affirming that ruling. See State v. Fernandez, 526 So.2d 192 (Fla. 3d DCA), cause dismissed, 531 So.2d 1352 (Fla.1988), and cases cited therein.

For the foregoing reasons, certiorari is granted and the decision of the Circuit Court Appellate Division affirming the erroneous suppression order is quashed with directions to reinstate.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

558 So. 2d 470, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1494, 1990 WL 26682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-moreno-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack