State v. Viltz

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State v. Viltz

891 So. 2d 1200, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 874, 2005 WL 236054

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 2, 2005

DocketNo. 4D04-908

StatusPublished

This text of 891 So. 2d 1200 (State v. Viltz) 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. Viltz, 891 So. 2d 1200, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 874, 2005 WL 236054 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress because a deputy came through a gate into defendant’s backyard without a search warrant. The state asserted that there were exigent circumstances, however, the trial court found that there were not and granted the motion. Because the backyard was clearly within the curtilage of defendant’s home, State v. Sarantopoulos, 604 So.2d 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), and there is evidence to support the findings, we affirm.

POLEN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress because a deputy came through a gate into defendant’s backyard without a search warrant. The state asserted that there were exigent circumstances, however, the trial court found that there were not and granted the motion. Because the backyard was clearly within the curtilage of defendant’s home, State v. Sarantopoulos, 604 So.2d 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), and there is evidence to support the findings, we affirm.

POLEN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

891 So. 2d 1200, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 874, 2005 WL 236054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-viltz-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack