GINA WALKER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed conviction, holding that police entry into Walker's apartment through a partially opened door was reasonable under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement because officers had good reason to believe unattended crying children might be in danger, and the subsequent seizure of crack cocaine and paraphernalia from plain sight was lawful.
Warrantless police entry into an apartment through a partially opened door is reasonable under the exigent circumstances exception when officers have good reason to believe unattended children on the premises may be in danger, and seizure of contraband in plain sight during such entry is lawful.
[1] Police may enter a residence without a warrant based on exigent circumstances when officers have reasonable grounds to believe unattended children on the premises may be…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice entered Gina Walker's apartment through a partially opened door after discovering two unattended crying children on the premises. Officers seiz…
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 Warrantless Seizure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Because (1) the warrantless police entry into the defendant Gina Walker’s apartment through a partially opened door was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 12 of the Flori-da Constitution, based on the exigent circumstances exception to the search warrant requirement rule, as the police, contrary to the defense argument, had good reason to believe that two unattended crying children on the premises may have been harmed by unknown persons, see Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 392, 98 S.Ct. 2408, 2413, 57 L.Ed.2d 290 (1978); Wooten v. State, 398 So. 2d 963, 966 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. dismissed, 407 So. 2d 1107 (Fla.1981); State v. Jones, 45 Or.App. 617, 608 P. 2d 1220, 1222, rev. denied, 289 Or. 337 (1980), and (2) the warrantless police seizure of crack cocaine and drug paraphernalia from the night stand in the bedroom of the apartment where one of the two children was located was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 12 of the Florida Constitution, based on the plain sight exception to the search warrant requirement rule, see Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, 83 S.Ct. 1623, 10 L.Ed.2d 726 (1963); Grant v. State, 374 So. 2d 630, 632 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Webster v. State, 201 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967), we conclude that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress the cocaine and drug paraphernalia. The final judgments of conviction and sentences under review are, accordingly,
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. State, 834 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…ons or property may .support a war-rantless entry into a home. See Rolling; Arango v. State, 411 So. 2d 172 (Fla.), cert. denied, 457 U.S. 1140, 102 S.Ct. 2973, 73 L.Ed.2d 1360 (1982); Richardson v. State, 247 So. 2d 296 (Fla.1971); Walker v. State, 617 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1993); State v. Mann, 440 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Hence, the police may enter a home to investigate a suspected burglary or to check on the safety of its residents, as those situations are generally considered exigent circumsta…
Authorities Cited
- KER et ux. v. California, 374 U.S. 23 (U.S. 1963)
- Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (U.S. 1978)
- Webster v. State, 201 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- Gennie Grant v. State, 374 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Wooten v. State, 398 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)