147 So. 3d 53
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2014Background
- Two consolidated appeals arising from suppression orders in cases against Manuel Ojeda, a known hydroponic marijuana grower with prior convictions; detective Edward Orenstein was sole state witness at both hearings.
- Case 05-37152: Nov. 30, 2005 — Orenstein and six other officers approached Ojeda’s home at 7:45 a.m.; Ojeda opened the door, invited them in, was Mirandized, and signed written consents to search home and vehicles; grow operation found in garage.
- Trial court suppressed evidence in 05-37152, finding consent coerced by show of authority and that Orenstein was not credible.
- Case 07-10526A: Mar. 23, 2007 — Orenstein and Officer Benjamin knocked at a different residence where Ojeda was believed to be; Ojeda opened the door and marijuana odor was detected at the threshold; officers entered, handcuffed Ojeda, performed protective sweep(s); grow operation observed in a later sweep; a warrant was obtained and contraband seized.
- Trial court suppressed evidence in 07-10526A as product of unlawful entry; the majority reversed both suppression orders, holding (1) consents in 05-37152 were voluntary and officer testimony credible, and (2) evidence in 07-10526A was admissible under independent-source / inevitable-discovery (and concurrence would also find exigent-circumstances justification).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Ojeda) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of consent to search (05-37152) | Consent was voluntary: adult, not impaired, prior criminal history, signed English consent forms after Miranda warnings, no coercive force | Consent involuntary due to number/position of officers, time of day, Miranda administration, and alleged overwhelming show of authority | Consent objectively voluntary; trial judge erred in finding Orenstein not credible; suppression reversed |
| Credibility of detective testimony | Orenstein’s uncontradicted testimony must be accepted absent impeachment | Defense argued Orenstein was not credible based on other hearings and inconsistencies | Court found no impeachment or contradiction in the record for these facts and credited Orenstein |
| Lawfulness of entry and searches (07-10526A) — initial knock and approach | Knock-and-talk at front door is a consensual encounter; officers lawfully approached; officer smelled marijuana at threshold giving probable cause | Entry and subsequent sweeps were unlawful and tainted ensuing seizure | Majority: entry to knock lawful; although initial physical entry was conceded illegal, the evidence discovered later was admissible via independent-source / inevitable-discovery; concurrence would also find exigent-circumstances justified immediate entry and protective sweep |
| Application of exclusionary-rule exceptions | Evidence admissible because information (odor of marijuana at threshold and observations) provided independent basis for warrant; inevitable discovery also applicable | Evidence was fruit of illegal entry and should be suppressed | Independent-source and inevitable-discovery doctrines apply; suppression reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (establishing custodial warnings requirement)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (consent to search judged by totality of circumstances)
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (heightened expectation of privacy in the home)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (limits on seizure and stop-and-frisk principles)
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (Fourth Amendment protects people’s expectations of privacy)
- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (independent source doctrine described)
- Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533 (independent source rule applied)
- Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796 (securing premises while obtaining warrant preserves admissibility)
- Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (inevitable discovery doctrine)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (fruit of the poisonous tree / attenuation analysis)
- State v. Mosier, 392 So.2d 602 (Fla. 3d DCA) (independent source validated admissibility despite prior illegality)
- State v. Griffith, 500 So.2d 240 (Fla. 3d DCA) (independent alternative means to discover evidence justified admission)
- Jackson v. State, 1 So.3d 273 (Fla. 1st DCA) (consent by property owner and inevitable discovery upheld admissibility)
- United States v. Tobin, 923 F.2d 1506 (11th Cir.) (odor of marijuana from open door can supply probable cause and support exigency analysis)