MIKEAL GLENNDALE HAMILTON
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.
An officer may conduct a traffic stop based on reasonable suspicion that a vehicle is being operated in an unusual manner indicating the driver is injured, ill, or impaired, even without observing a traffic infraction.
[1] An officer may conduct a traffic stop based on reasonable suspicion that a vehicle is being operated in an unusual manner indicating impairment or incapacity, even withou…
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 intelligence“Florida law is clear that an officer is justified in stopping a vehicle even in the absence of a traffic infraction when the vehicle is being operated in an unusual manner causing legitimate concern for the safety of the public.”
Court citing State v. Sheldon, 394 So. 3d 1263, 1265 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)
Hamilton was stopped by an officer who observed his vehicle being operated in an unusual manner. Hamilton subsequently pled no contest to driving unde…
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 Driving Under The Influence cases and more on FLexlaw
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 6D2024-1342 Lower Tribunal No. 2024-CT-400416-A-O _____________________________
MIKEAL GLENNDALE HAMILTON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________
Appeal from the County Court for Orange County. Amy J. Carter, Judge.
September 5, 2025
BROWNLEE, J.
Mikeal Hamilton pled no contest to driving under the influence and reserved the right to appeal the denial of his dispositive motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop. Because the dash-cam video and other record evidence supports the court’s conclusion that Hamilton’s driving pattern gave the officer reasonable suspicion to believe he was injured, ill, or otherwise impaired, we affirm. See, e.g., State v. Sheldon, 394 So. 3d 1263, 1265 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024) (“Florida law is clear that an officer is justified in stopping a vehicle even in the absence of a traffic
2
infraction when the vehicle is being operated in an unusual manner causing legitimate concern for the safety of the public.”).
AFFIRMED.
STARGEL and NARDELLA, JJ., concur.
Blair Allen, Public Defender, and William L. Sharwell, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marissa V. Giles, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.