ISHMAEL COLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1990-02-06
No. 89-1215
Before HUBBART, COPE and GODERICH, JJ.
559 So. 2d 622 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the denial of the motion to suppress and the motion to dismiss the firearm charge were proper.


Facts & Procedural History

Defendant was arrested for carrying a concealed firearm and unlawful possession of cannabis. He moved to suppress evidence and dismiss the firearm cha…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Ishmael Coley pled nolo contendere to charges of carrying a concealed firearm and unlawful possession of cannabis, with an express reservation of the right to appeal denial of his motion to suppress and motion to dismiss the firearm charge. We affirm.

The officers had probable cause to arrest Coley for carrying a concealed firearm. See Myers v. State, 546 So. 2d 754, 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). That being so, the search of the remainder of the passenger compartment was a proper search incident to a lawful arrest. New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, 460, 101 S.Ct. 2860, 2864, 69 L.Ed.2d 768, 775 (1981). The search was also a lawful search of the passenger compartment for weapons. Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469, 3481, 77 L.Ed.2d 1201, 1219-20 (1983). Contraband found in the course of that search was lawfully seized. Id. The motion to suppress was properly denied.

The motion to dismiss the firearm charge was correctly denied. The question whether the firearm was concealed was, on this record, a factual issue for resolution at trial. See Ensor v. State, 403 So. 2d 349, 354-55 (Fla.1981); State v. Carda, 495 So. 2d 912, 914 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Gordon v. Colin, 997 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
    …l responsibility. Florida courts have rejected appellant’s reading of the statute. “[T]he parent having primary residential custody is the one who has standing to bring a suit on behalf of the child for an alleged injury to the child.” A.A. v. E.P., 559 So. 2d 622, 623 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (citing Lusker v. Guardianship [*1138] of Lusker, 434 So. 2d 951 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Mills v. Phillips, 407 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)). Thus, the trial court correctly concluded that appellant was not his son’s “natural…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw