Valdez v. State
This text of 573 So. 2d 191 (Valdez v. State) 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
We affirm the final judgment of conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of cocaine upon a holding that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the subject cocaine. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, there was no pretextual stop of the defendant shown on this record, and, in any event, such an alleged stop could not taint and render inadmissible at trial the defendant’s [192]*192otherwise voluntary abandonment of the subject cocaine on the public street. See Kehoe v. State, 521 So.2d 1094 (Fla.1988); State v. Bartee, 568 So.2d 523 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); State v. Oliver, 368 So.2d 1331 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. dismissed, 383 So.2d 1200 (Fla.1980); Freyre v. State, 362 So.2d 989 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 372 So.2d 468 (Fla.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 857, 100 S.Ct. 118, 62 L.Ed.2d 76 (1979).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
573 So. 2d 191, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 400, 1991 WL 4339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valdez-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.