Legal Opinion

State v. Emery

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 24, 1982No. 81-115PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant Emery was not subjected to a sham or pretextual arrest. Moreover, it is legally certain that the arresting officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant for a misdemeanor1 committed in his presence before he removed certain items protruding from the defendant’s pocket. Consequently, it is irrelevant that the officer did not announce his intent to arrest until after he removed the items. Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98, 100 S.Ct. 2556, 65 L.Ed.2d 633 (1980); Thomas v. State, 395 So.2d 280 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); State v. Forbes, 353 So.2d 638 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Dixon v. State,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rawlings v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Dixon v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
  3. Thomas v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
  4. State v. ForbesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Wright v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  2. State v. JamesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  3. State v. GiffordDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  4. State v. PowellCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API