History
  • No items yet
midpage
Eisenman v. State
320 So. 2d 34
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1975
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Following the trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress certain incriminating evidence, the defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to a charge of unlawful possession of cocaine, was adjudicated guilty, sentenced, and then brought this appeal. A review of the record fails to reflect defendant’s specific reservation of his right to appeal the ruling on his motion to suppress. Accordingly, upon the authority of and for those reasons expressed in Jackson v. State, Fla.App. 1974, 294 So.2d 114, the appeal does not lie.

However, it might be gratuitously observed that had the court reached the merits of this, appeal, namely, whether the cocaine found in defendant’s briefcase as a result of an airport security inspection was obtained through an illegal search and seizure, the judgment of conviction and sentence would have been affirmed. The search in question was proper under the particular facts and circumstances of this case in light of recent decisions recognizing the validity of pre-flight procedures *35used at airports to prevent hijacking of aircraft. 14 A.L.R. Fed. 286-297; United States v. Skipmith, 5 Cir. 1973, 482 F.2d 1272.

Appeal dismissed.

MAGER and DOWNEY, JJ., and BER-ANEK, JOHN R., Associate Judge, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Eisenman v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Oct 10, 1975
Citation: 320 So. 2d 34
Docket Number: No. 74-1459
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.