Legal Opinion

Hankerson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 31, 2010No. 4D08-3055PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFarmer, J.

Defendant appeals a conviction for possession of cocaine for sale. We agree the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress evidence obtained in an invalid search.

Two officers, Lucas and Schmidt, were involved in the search and seizure of defendant. Lucas heard that a certain address was a problem area in the community. Residents at homeowners meetings, along with reports from confidential informants, gave Lucas to believe that people might be selling drugs at this residence. He conducted surveillance from an unmarked vehicle.

Defendant arrived at the address late one afternoon and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Ornelas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Parker v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2004
  4. Coney v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
  5. Robinson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. HankersonSupreme Court of Florida · 2011
  2. State v. HankersonSupreme Court of Florida · 2011
  3. State v. HankersonSupreme Court of Florida · 2011
  4. State v. M.R.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API