Edwin Aguiar v. State
199 So. 3d 920
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Edwin Aguiar was a front-seat passenger in a car stopped for a broken brake light and seat-belt violation; when the driver parked at a restaurant, Aguiar immediately exited the passenger door.
- The traffic officer ordered Aguiar back into the vehicle; after Aguiar complied, the officer observed a bag of cocaine and Aguiar was arrested and charged (Aguiar pled nolo contendere but reserved suppression challenge).
- A panel of the Fifth District initially reversed Aguiar’s convictions based on Fourth District precedent (Wilson v. State) holding passengers may choose to leave a traffic-stop scene.
- The State sought rehearing en banc, arguing U.S. Supreme Court decisions (Brendlin, Johnson) require reconsideration of Wilson.
- The Fifth District, sitting en banc, held ordering a passenger who attempts to leave back into the car is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and receded from F.J.R. v. State; it certified conflict with Wilson and related Florida decisions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an officer may detain a passenger who attempts to leave during a lawful traffic stop | Aguiar: passenger should be free to leave; detaining an "innocent passenger" is a greater liberty intrusion than ordering a passenger out of the car | State: officer safety and command of the scene justify detaining passengers who try to leave; recent SCOTUS precedent supports routine control of occupants | Held: Officer may order passenger back and detain for duration of stop; detention reasonable under Fourth Amendment |
| Whether Wilson v. State remains good law in light of Brendlin and Johnson | Aguiar: Wilson controls; passengers may choose to depart | State: Brendlin and Johnson require overruling Wilson | Held: Court receded from F.J.R. and certified conflict with Wilson and related Florida cases; Wilson incorrect post-Brendlin/Johnson |
| Whether a passenger is "seized" during a traffic stop and may challenge constitutionality | Aguiar: passenger lacked individualized suspicion; departure should be permitted | State: passenger is seized for duration of stop and not free to terminate encounter | Held: Following Brendlin, passenger is seized and would not feel free to leave without permission; seizure reasonable for duration of stop |
| Whether minimal intrusion for passenger outweighs safety interest | Aguiar: preventing departure is a meaningful liberty intrusion | State: intrusion is minimal compared to officer safety risks and the need for unquestioned command | Held: Court balanced interests and found officer safety outweighs the minimal intrusion; detention permissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (officer may as a matter of course order driver out of lawfully stopped car; balancing test & officer safety rationale)
- Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (extends Mimms to permit ordering passengers out of stopped car; emphasizes officer safety and routine command)
- Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (passengers are seized during traffic stops and may challenge constitutionality; reasonable passenger would not feel free to leave)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (for duration of a traffic stop, occupants are lawfully detained; Terry principles apply to frisk if armed-dangerous suspicion arises)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (stop-and-frisk framework used to assess reasonableness of investigatory stops and frisks)
- Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692 (officers may exercise routine control at premises where warrant is executed; analogous justification for command of scene)
- Wilson v. State, 734 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (held passengers could choose to leave traffic-stop scene; Fifth District certified conflict and receded)