STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
NOREEN MARIE WILDES, THOMAS O'NEAL WILDES, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The State appeals a trial court order suppressing evidence seized under a search warrant based on an affidavit from a confidential informant. The appellate court reverses, applying the good-faith exception from United States v. Leon because the warrant was regular on its face and the affidavit contained sufficient detail regarding the informant's allegations to support reasonable reliance by the executing officer.
The court reverses the suppression order and applies the good-faith exception, holding that the warrant was regular on its face and the affidavit was not so lacking in indicia of probable cause that the executing officer could not reasonably rely in good faith on the magistrate's probable-cause determination and the warrant's technical sufficiency.
[1] Probable cause for a search warrant requires facts establishing both the commission of a crime and a nexus between the crime and the place to be searched.
[2] Information supporting a search warrant affidavit is not stale if there is sufficient basis to believe, based on a continuing pattern or other good reasons, that the item…
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the search warrant was regular on its face and that the affidavit upon which it was based was not so lacking in indicia of probable cause that the officer executing the warrant could not with reasonable objectivity rely in good faith on the magistrate's probable-cause determination and on the technical sufficiency of the warrant”
Establishes the test applied: a warrant regular on its face with an affidavit not completely lacking in probable cause indicia allows good-faith reliance by the executing officer.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice obtained a search warrant based on an affidavit containing information from an unidentified confidential informant. The affidavit provided cons…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Confidential Informant Reliability cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
The State appeals an order suppressing evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. The trial judge suppressing the evidence believed that the evidence presented by affidavit to the magistrate issuing the search warrant was insufficient to establish probable cause for issuance of the warrant. The warrant was based on the affidavit of a police officer which was based primarily on information obtained from an unidentified confidential informant. The affidavit contained no specific facts regarding the reliability of the informant although the acts themselves contained considerable detail indicating the presence of contraband at the residence authorized to be searched.
The State cites the usual cases1 and Tippins v. State, 454 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); State v. Vanwinkle, 444 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Bradford v. State, 448 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Zaner v. State, 444 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Graham v. State, 438 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Defendant cites Blue v. State, 441 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
We will not undertake to reconcile or distinguish the cases cited nor review the facts in the affidavit to determine if we believe that the officer making the affidavit and the magistrate issuing the search warrant acted reasonably in determining that the details in the facts given by the confidential informant were themselves sufficient to provide their own indicia of reliability and to justify a reasonable belief in their authenticity. Rather, we note that the search warrant was regular on its face and that the affidavit upon which it was based was not so lacking in indicia of probable cause that the officer executing the warrant could not with reasonable objectivity rely in good faith on the magistrate’s probable-cause determination and on the technical sufficiency of the warrant. Accordingly, we apply the good-faith exception enunciated in United States v. Leon, — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984), reverse the order suppressing the evidence seized pursuant to the search warrant in this case, and remand for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
COBB, C.J., and ORFINGER, J., concur. . Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983); Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vasquez v. State, 491 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…ormation, and no independent investigation was attempted by the officers. Under these circumstances, the Leon “good faith exception” is inapplicable, and the lower court erred in denying Vasquez’s motion to suppress the weapons. Cf. State v. Wildes, 468 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (good faith exception exists where affidavit included considerable detail indicating presence of contraband). We therefore reverse and remand with directions to vacate the judgment of conviction and the order revoking probation.…
-
State v. Bernie, 472 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…e unsworn supporting affidavit was so fundamentally defective that no Florida police officer could objectively reasonably rely in good faith on the circuit judge’s probable cause determination and the sufficiency of the warrant. See State v. Wildes, 468 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Therefore, based on these circumstances, this court found that the circuit judge was not provided “with a substantial basis for determining the existence of probable cause.” Leon, 104 S.Ct. at 3417 (quoting Illinois v. Gates, 46…
-
State v. Georgoudiou, 560 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…uppression order. There was no logical or legal basis in the record for the trial court’s conclusion that Martino’s affidavit was false or recklessly disregarded the truth. Accordingly, the instant suppression order is reversed. See State v. Wildes, 468 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). REVERSED. DAUKSCH and SHARP, W., JJ., concur. HARRIS, J., concurs and concurs specially, with opinion, with which DAUKSCH, J., concurs. GRIFFIN, J., concurs in result only. COWART, J., dissents, with opinion in which DANIEL…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- Illinois v. Gates et ux., 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983)
- Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (U.S. 1964)
- Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 (U.S. 1969)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984)
- Zaner v. State, 444 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Berry O. Russell v. State, 441 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- State v. Caso, 441 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Tippins v. State, 454 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- State v. Vanwinkle, 444 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
- In the Interest of L.M., 438 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)