BACON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 totality of the circumstances provided the officer with sufficient probable cause to search Bacon's vehicle, and the trial court properly denied his motion to suppress.
[1] Probable cause to search a vehicle must be determined by examining the totality of the circumstances rather than relying on any single factor in isolation.
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 intelligenceBacon was stopped for a traffic violation and his car was searched, yielding cocaine, marijuana, and drug paraphernalia. Bacon entered a plea while re…
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 Motion To Suppress Contraband cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
DEMETRO L. BACON,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
No. 2D2024-0848
June 27, 2025
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Manatee County; Stephen Mathew Whyte, Judge.
Blair Allen, Public Defender and Andrew Verblow, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Lara E. Breslow, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Demetro Bacon appeals his judgment and sentence for possession of cocaine, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, and resisting an officer without violence. He entered a plea to the charges, reserving his right to appeal the denial of his dispositive motion
2
to suppress the contraband found in his car after he was stopped for a traffic violation. We affirm. Bacon argues that the search of his car was unlawful. He contends that "[g]iven the current state of the law," the officer lacked probable cause to search his car based solely on the odor of marijuana. We need not decide this issue, however, because the smell of marijuana was only one of the factors relied upon to justify the search. Because the record shows that the totality of the circumstances provided the officer with sufficient probable cause to search Bacon's car, we affirm the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress. See Hatcher v. State, 342 So. 3d 807, 810 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (stating that courts must consider the totality of the circumstances in determining probable cause to search a vehicle). Affirmed.
NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and MOE, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.