Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Williams

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 10, 1999No. 98-2839Published

1DissentW. Sharp, J.

I respectfully dissent because the record is insufficient to conclude the trial court erred in this case by granting the defendant’s motion to suppress.

There were two possible reasons for granting the motion. First, the trial court could have concluded that the odor of contraband exuding from a vehicle does not give a police officer probable cause to search it. That is wrong. State v. Wynn, 623 So.2d 848 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); State v. T.T., 594 So.2d 839, 840 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); State v. Bowden, 538 So.2d 83 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).

Second, the trial judge could have found, as a matter of fact, that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. McNamara v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1978
  2. Carraway v. Armour and CompanySupreme Court of Florida · 1963
  3. State v. T.T.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
  4. Knox v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
  5. Woodbury v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API