State v. Cable
51 So. 3d 434
| Fla. | 2010Background
- Cable challenged the suppression of evidence for a Florida knock-and-announce violation under §901.19(1) after a deputy entered without stating purpose.
- Deputy Lawrence announced authority but not purpose; he entered the motel room and found Cable, her husband, and others; methamphetamine was found.
- Trial court denied suppression; defense relied on Benefield (statutory violation yields exclusion) with Urquhart as context.
- Second District reversed, applying Benefield and Urquhart to suppress the evidence; recognized Hudson questioned applicability of exclusion for constitutional knock-and-announce.
- This Court held Hudson does not automatically control Florida statutory knock-and-announce remedies and declined to recede from Benefield.
- Court remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion; a dissent argued for receding from Benefield and aligning with Hudson.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Hudson require receding Benefield on statutory knock-and-announce? | Cable argues Hudson mandates receding Benefield. | Cable counters that Hudson does not govern state statutes; Benefield should stay. | Hudson does not control statutory remedy; not recede. |
| Should Benefield be receded for Florida statutory knock-and-announce violations? | Benefield should be overruled in light of Hudson and state interests. | Benefield remains valid and longstanding. | Do not recede; Benefield remains applicable. |
| Does Florida constitution amendment or Jenkins affect the outcome? | Amendment may require Hudson-like reasoning; Jenkins suggests limitations. | Amendment and Jenkins do not compel reversal here. | Amendment and Jenkins not controlling; not dispositive. |
Key Cases Cited
- Benefield v. State, 160 So.2d 706 (Fla.1964) (statutory knock-and-announce exclusionary remedy originally adopted)
- Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (U.S. 2006) (exclusion not required for Fourth Amendment knock-and-announce violations)
- Urquhart v. State, 211 So.2d 79 (Fla.2d DCA 1968) (less extreme statutory violations context cited by lower court)
- Jenkins v. State, 978 So.2d 116 (Fla.2008) (statutory remedies and legislative silence influence exclusionary scope)
- State v. Loeffler, 410 So.2d 589 (Fla.1982) (statutory knock-and-announce context and purposes)
- Bernie v. State, 524 So.2d 988 (Fla.1988) (constitutional text guiding federal conformity interpretation)
- Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927 (U.S.1995) (common-law knock-and-announce recognized as Fourth Amendment component)
- State v. Slaney, 653 So.2d 422 (Fla.3d DCA 1995) (states may adopt higher standards than the Fourth Amendment)