I.T. v. State, 614 So. 2d 582

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that, in the totality of the surrounding circumstances, the officer’s ‍​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‍plain view observation of a plastic baggy of a type uniquely used for narcotics sticking out of the respondent’s pocket provided probable cause for ‍​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‍his arrest and subsequent search. P.L.R. v. State, 455 So.2d 363 (Fla.1984); Cross v. State, 560 So.2d 228 (Fla.1990 ); Council v. State, 442 So.2d 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Hence, the motion to ‍​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‍suppress the drugs found in the bag was properly denied and the adjudication on appeal in case number 92-1075 is therefore affirmed.

The imposition, on ‍​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‍a separate charge, of community control without sanctions, which is challenged by the state in case number 92-947, was admittedly not entered in conformance ‍​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‍with sections 39.052; 39.-054, Florida Statutes (1991), and is therefore vacated.

Affirmed, vacated.

Case Details

Case Name: I.T. v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: Feb 16, 1993

Citations: 614 So. 2d 582; 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 1974; Nos. 92-947, 92-1075

Docket Number: Nos. 92-947, 92-1075

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.