State v. Uriguen

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Uriguen

486 So. 2d 682, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 887, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7326

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 15, 1986

DocketNo. 85-1482

StatusPublished

This text of 486 So. 2d 682 (State v. Uriguen) 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. Uriguen, 486 So. 2d 682, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 887, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7326 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The sole point for our consideration in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in suppressing evidence which was, admittedly, illegally seized, upon a finding that, as a matter of law, the exclusionary rule applies to probation revocation proceedings under Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution as amended in 1983. This court has recently so held, relying upon State v. Dodd, 419 So.2d 333 (Fla.1982): Mendiola v. State, 490 So.2d 75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); State v. Pearson, 476 So.2d 760 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) as have the second and fourth districts. Cross v. State, 469 So.2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Tamer v. State, 463 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 4d DCA 1985).

We, accordingly, affirm and join the cited cases in certifying to the Florida Supreme Court the following question as one of great public interest:

Does the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule apply in probation revocation proceedings in light of the 1983 amend[683]*683ment to Article I, Section 12, of the Florida Constitution?

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The sole point for our consideration in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in suppressing evidence which was, admittedly, illegally seized, upon a finding that, as a matter of law, the exclusionary rule applies to probation revocation proceedings under Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution as amended in 1983. This court has recently so held, relying upon State v. Dodd, 419 So.2d 333 (Fla.1982): Mendiola v. State, 490 So.2d 75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); State v. Pearson, 476 So.2d 760 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) as have the second and fourth districts. Cross v. State, 469 So.2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Tamer v. State, 463 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 4d DCA 1985).

We, accordingly, affirm and join the cited cases in certifying to the Florida Supreme Court the following question as one of great public interest:

Does the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule apply in probation revocation proceedings in light of the 1983 amend[683]*683ment to Article I, Section 12, of the Florida Constitution?

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

486 So. 2d 682, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 887, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-uriguen-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack