Legal Opinion

Kell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 18, 1990No. 89-2136PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant pled nolo contendere to a charge of possession of cocaine, but reserved his right to appeal the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress. We reverse.

It is axiomatic that in determining whether an officer possesses a reasonable or well-founded suspicion of criminal activity so as to justify an investigatory stop the “totality of the circumstances” must be taken into account. Although the detention may be based on something less than probable cause, it cannot be based upon mere suspicion of criminal activity. See Ruddack v. State, 537 So.2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); King v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. State v. PyeDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  3. State v. HooverDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  4. Ruddack v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  5. King v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Burgess v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  2. Woodson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  3. In the Interest of J.L.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
  4. Woodson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API