Zimmerman v. State

505 So. 2d 517, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 850, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12087
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Zimmerman v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1123
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 25, 1987·No. No. 4-86-0721·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We hold that the trial court was eminently correct, upon the facts presented, in denying the motion to suppress. The marine patrol acted lawfully when it stopped the boat for a decal violation1 and when it subsequently boarded the boat for a registration check and safety inspection.2 See State v. Casal, 410 So.2d 152 (Fla.1982), cert. dismissed, 462 U.S. 637, 103 S.Ct. 3100, 77 L.Ed.2d 277 (1983); Sherman v. State, 419 So.2d 375 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

While on board, the marijuana was discovered in plain view and smell.

We, therefore, affirm the judgment and sentence.3

Affirmed.

DOWNEY and STONE, JJ., and LEONARD RIVKIND, Associate Judge, concur.

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

Zimmerman v. State, 505 So. 2d 517, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 850, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12087 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

505 So. 2d 517 (Zimmerman v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Florida v. Casal
462 U.S. 637 (Supreme Court, 1983)
State v. Casal
410 So. 2d 152 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1982)
Sherman v. State
419 So. 2d 375 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
State v. Abeles
483 So. 2d 460 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)