Robinson v. StateRobinson v. State
Willie Mae ROBINSON, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Florida, Respondent.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender and Louis G. Carres, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Alfonso M. Saldana, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.
BARKETT, Justice.
We have for review Robinson v. State,
DOES THE 1983 AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE I SECTION 12 OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION, COUPLED WITH THE COLORADO v. BERTINE DECISION,[[1]] OVERRULE MILLER v. STATE,[[2]] PROVIDING [sic] THE POLICE ARE NOT ACTING IN BAD FAITH?
We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We answer the question in the affirmative and affirm.
Because of a traffic infraction, police stopped a rental car in which petitioner was a passenger,[3] and later conducted an inventory search on the vehicle. During the search, police found contraband, which the trial court admitted into evidence against petitioner. It is undisputed that the police in this case did not provide an alternative to impoundment, as required by Miller v. *96 State,
In the recent decision of State v. Wells,
It is so ordered.
EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
NOTES
Notes
[1] Colorado v. Bertine,
[2] Miller v. State,
[3] Both the traffic infraction and stop were not in issue in the district court below and accordingly will not be reviewed here. See Robinson v. State,