STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
AUSTIN CHASE MELLACI
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.
A traffic stop is valid when the officer observed conduct constituting traffic violations, and the trial court's finding of pretext is not supported by evidence.
[1] Under the objective test for evaluating traffic stops, the only relevant inquiry is whether probable cause existed for the stop; the officer's subjective intent or motiva…
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“[A]pplying the objective test, generally the only determination to be made is whether probable cause existed for the stop in question.”
Holland v. State, cited for the standard that officer's subjective intent is not relevant to validity of traffic stop
An officer stopped Mellaci after observing him weaving across several lanes of rush hour traffic and causing nearby drivers to brake and take evasive …
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 Pretextual Traffic Stop cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-835
AUSTIN CHASE MELLACI,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed October 25, 2019
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Bob Leblanc, Judge.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah A. Chance, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
Michael T. McGinn, and Corey I. Cohen, of Law Office of Corey I. Cohen, Orlando, for Appellee.
HARRIS, J.
The State appeals the trial court’s order granting Austin Melacci’s motion to dismiss. We agree with the State that the trial court erred when it attempted to divine the officer’s reason for making the traffic stop in this case. See Holland v. State, 696 So. 2d 757, 759 (Fla. 1997) (“[A]pplying the objective test, generally the only determination to be made is whether probable cause existed for the stop in question.”). Here, the officer
2 testified that he stopped Melacci after observing him weaving across several lanes of rush hour traffic and causing nearby drivers to brake and take other evasive measures. The evidence showed that the officer had probable cause to believe that Melacci had committed one or more traffic violations. The trial court’s finding that the stop was pretextual is not supported by the evidence, and it was error to grant the motion to suppress based on that finding. Therefore, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
COHEN and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.