State v. Exantus
59 So. 3d 359
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- State appeals an order granting Exantus's suppression motion and Exantus cross-appeals the denial of suppression of evidence from an allegedly unlawful vehicle search.
- Deputy Fithian stopped Exantus, had a narcotics dog alert around the vehicle, and sought a warrant for an ion scan of the interior after narcotics testing and a bag of cash were found.
- The vehicle search yielded approximately $83,220 in currency wrapped in rubber-banded bundles inside a bag in the rear of the vehicle, which supported the plan to perform an ion scan.
- The magistrate issued a search warrant based on Deputy Fithian's affidavit linking stop conduct, dog alerts, and cash to suspected narcotics activity.
- The ion scan detected MDMA and cocaine, triggering suppression arguments based on allegedly deficient probable-cause information in the affidavit.
- The trial court suppressed the ion-scan results, which the Second District reverses in part, remanding for further proceedings while affirming the initial vehicle search.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the magistrate had probable cause for the ion-scan warrant. | State asserts totality supports probable cause. | Exantus argues omissions deprive probable cause. | Probable cause established; reversal on this issue. |
| Whether omissions in the affidavit invalidated the warrant. | N/A | Omissions could defeat probable cause if material. | Omissions did not defeat probable cause; no purposeful deception established. |
| Whether the trial court erred in applying de novo review to the magistrate’s probable-cause determination. | N/A | Trial court failed to give deference to magistrate. | Trial court erred in not applying proper deference; remand for further proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Vanderhors, 927 So.2d 1011 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (probable cause limited to affidavit; totality of circumstances)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause under totality of the circumstances; deference to magistrate)
- Pilieci v. State, 991 So.2d 883 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (defer to magistrate; review for substantial basis)
- Johnson v. State, 660 So.2d 648 (Fla.1995) (omissions in affidavit; consider omitted material; due process)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (misstatements; misrepresentations in affidavits; not directly applicable to omissions)
- Rios v. State, 483 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (probable cause review standards)