From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Stevens

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Oct 26, 1982
421 So. 2d 41 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. 81-2764.

October 26, 1982.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Herbert M. Klein, J.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and Diane Leeds, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Asst. Public Defender, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, SCHWARTZ, and NESBITT, JJ.


The order granting the defendant's motion to suppress his photographic identification is reversed because the photograph in question was properly procured as a result of a search incident to defendant's lawful arrest for the misdemeanor of furnishing a police officer with false information. In a light most favorable to the defendant, it was established that, in response to a Terry stop, the defendant furnished the investigating police officer with the name of Michael Robbins, while at the same time, the policeman observed the word "David" tattooed upon his forearm. Some two hours later, the same police officer stopped the defendant in connection with a second incident. The defendant stated that his name was Jeff Woodson. When the officer asked the defendant for his real name, he reinforced his previous answers in replying, "I already told you." This disparate information afforded the police officer with authority to arrest the defendant for furnishing false information, which is a violation of Metropolitan Dade County Code Section 21-26(A)(3)(a), punishable as a misdemeanor pursuant to Section 125.69, Florida Statutes (1979). Alexander v. State, 418 So.2d 432 (Fla. 3d DCA).

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968).

For the foregoing reasons, the order granting the defendant's motion to suppress his photographic identification is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.


I concur in reversal, both for the reason stated in the majority opinion and because the result reached below would be incorrect even if the photograph of the defendant later employed for identification purposes had been initially improperly secured. United States v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463, 100 S.Ct. 1244, 63 L.Ed.2d 537 (1980); State v. Maier, 378 So.2d 1288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), and cases cited.


Summaries of

State v. Stevens

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Oct 26, 1982
421 So. 2d 41 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

State v. Stevens

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT, v. DAVID E. STEVENS, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Oct 26, 1982

Citations

421 So. 2d 41 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

Muehleman v. State

We therefore find the initial detention and arrest lawful. See State v. Stevens, 421 So.2d 41 (Fla.3d DCA…

Epprecht v. State

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. United States v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463, 100 S.Ct. 1244, 63 L.Ed.2d 537 (1980); State v.…