From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Murphy v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 7, 1971
252 So. 2d 261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Opinion

No. 71-205.

September 7, 1971.

Appeal from the Criminal Court of Record for Dade County, Ellen J. Morphonios, J.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kimler, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Barry Scott Richard, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HENDRY and BARKDULL, JJ.


On appeal by the defendant from conviction of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, the contention presented is that the trial court committed error in denying the defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained upon search following arrest and in denying defendant's motion for acquittal at the close of the plaintiff's case, on the ground that the arrest was unlawful.

The officer who made the arrest had observed the defendant in the commission of a felony for which he subsequently was arrested. The officer had filed charges with the state attorney for issuance of an arrest warrant. Thereafter, assuming the warrant had been issued, the arrest was made. The trial court was not in error in rejecting the defendant's contention of unlawful arrest. On the facts of this case, Gossett v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 188 So.2d 836, relied on by the appellant is not applicable. The arrest was lawful under § 901.15 Fla. Stat., F.S.A.; either under subsection (4) if the warrant was outstanding, or under subsection (3) thereof in the absence of a warrant.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Murphy v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 7, 1971
252 So. 2d 261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)
Case details for

Murphy v. State

Case Details

Full title:JOE LEWIS MURPHY, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Sep 7, 1971

Citations

252 So. 2d 261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Citing Cases

Oliva v. State

Appellant's arrest pursuant to the outstanding warrants was valid. Wigfall v. State, 323 So.2d at 589; State…

Wigfall v. State

With this standard in mind, we hold that the arrest of the appellant was valid under the outstanding bench…