History
  • No items yet
midpage
Perez v. State
383 So. 2d 769
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1980
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

The appellant, after an adverse jury verdict, was convicted of possession of over one hundred pounds of marijuana.

He was apprehended by a policeman at about 6:15 A.M. after he was observed behind a furniture and appliance store in Key West carrying a bale of marijuana or “square grouper”. At a motion to suppress hearing, the defendant urged that it was an unlawful search and unreasonable seizure. The trial court denied same. . On appeal, appellant urges error; we find none. State v. Ashby, 245 So.2d 225 (Fla.1971); State v. Belcher, 317 So.2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 99 S.Ct. 421, 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978).

A reasonable view of the record reveals that the truck and the defendant were on a public street loáding something at the rear of an appliance store in the early morning hours, not normal hours of operation. The police officer was justified in investigating and .he had a right to seize what he saw, which he testified he knew to be marijuana. Lightfoot v. State, 356 So.2d 331 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Albo v. State, 379 So.2d 648 (Fla.1980).

The appellant also attempted to raise a question in this court on the class of crime charged but he did not in the trial court. His complaint comes too late. Andrews v. State, 309 So.2d 576, 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), specially concurring opinion; Thompson v. State, 368 So.2d 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

Therefore, the verdict, judgment of conviction, and sentence be and they are hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Perez v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: May 20, 1980
Citation: 383 So. 2d 769
Docket Number: No. 79-1847
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.