King v. State
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 2407
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Officer responded to a domestic disturbance at appellant Wolf's home; wife remained at the home.
- Officer knew Wolf was a convicted felon and asked the wife about guns in the home; she said there was a gun.
- Wife led officer to a safe in the bedroom/closet; she did not have a key; safe contained appellant's belongings only.
- Officer removed the safe and opened it with a screwdriver in the patrol car; gun found inside.
- Motion to suppress denied; court held inevitable discovery could justify the search, but the record lacked evidence of warrant pursuit.
- Court reversed, concluding lack of probable-cause evidence of imminent warrant pursuit and improper consent analyses invalidated the search.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether inevitable discovery supported the search | State | Wolf | Inevitable discovery not shown; trial court erred |
| Whether wife's consent was valid under common authority | State | Wolf | Consent invalid; wife lacked actual mutual use of the safe |
| Whether officers could rely on apparent authority for consent | State | Wolf | Apparent authority insufficient; further inquiry required |
| Whether exigent circumstances justified warrantless search | State | Wolf | Exigent circumstances not present; no justification |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell v. State, 981 So.2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (inevitable discovery requires effort to obtain warrant and probable cause for warrant)
- U.S. v. Reilly, 224 F.3d 986 (9th Cir.2000) (inevitable discovery limited; cannot excuse warrantless search)
- U.S. v. Echegoyen, 799 F.2d 1271 (9th Cir.1986) (inevitable discovery limitations)
- U.S. v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974) (consent by third party with common authority)
- Kelly v. State, 77 So.3d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (common authority does not permit search of personal property without mutual use)
- Marganet v. State, 927 So.2d 52 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (mutual use and common authority required for third-party consent)
- Brock v. State, 24 So.3d 703 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (apparent authority requires reasonable basis and inquiry)