|
In the case of State v. Watana, the Florida appellate court upheld the lower court's ruling granting the defendant's motion to suppress, holding that the record gave support to the circuit court's ruling that defendant's purported consent to search wasn't voluntary. The facts of the case are as follows: Around 3 o'clock in the morning on the }date in question, a police officer stopped defendant after observing the defendant commit a traffic infraction. According to the police officer he observed, the defendant's vehicle traveling between ninty & one hundred mph over a bridge. The police officer also saw defendant's car crossing all traffic lanes. The defendant didn't immediately pull over, but proceeded a short distance & then parked behind a closed business. The officer said that defendant's behavior was unusual, since the defendant had ample places to safely stop his vehicle on 17th Street. As defendant sat in the driver's seat, the police officer asked for defendant's license & registration. The defendant was noticably nervous, and kept looking around and over his shoulder. The officer described defendant as being distracted while the officer was talking to him, defendant was picking up items located in the car that were not related to the stop, and sweating profusely.  The police officer ordered defendant out of the car after observing defendant's behavior. The police officer claimed he requested permission in order to search the defendant's person, & that defendant consented and complied, never resisting the officer or withdrawing consent. When asked whether he had reason to believe the defendant was in possession of any weapons, the officer testified that he just had a heightened suspicion. The police officer put his hand on the inside of defendant's right front pocket and pulled out a small baggy which contained cocaine residue. Defendant filed a motion to suppress the cocaine, alleging in part that it was obtained during an unlawful detention & that he didn't provide consent to the officer's request to search but, simply gave in to the officer's authority. The defendant stated that he didn't remember exactly what speed he was driving that night, but that it was not 90 to 100 miles per hour. He was nervous when he saw the police officer behind him since it was 3:00 a.m., and that he was out later than he told told his wife. The defendant looked for a spot to stop safely. When he saw the police officer approaching his vehicle, he rolled his window down. He gave the police officer his license, registration, & insurance card, when the officer requested those items. When the officer came back to the defendant's vehicle shortly thereafter, the police officer ordered defendant out of the vehicle. The defendant complied. The defendant didn't realize that he had the option to refuse. The officer asked
Related Articles -
criminal attorney, criminal lawyer, dui attorney,
|
