Rowell v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012-03-28 · cited 8×
In Rowell v. State, the defendant appealed the denial of his motion to suppress a firearm and his resulting conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The appellate court reversed, holding that the warrantless entry into the defendant's apartment violated the Fourth Amendment. Officers responded to a shots-fired call, detained the defendant outside the building, and entered his third-floor apartment without a warrant to conduct a protective sweep after the door was found open, discovering the gun on a counter. The entry was not justified by exigent circumstances because the scene was secured with a perimeter and time existed to obtain a warrant, nor by the protective sweep doctrine because officers lacked a reasonable belief that anyone inside posed a danger. The inevitable discovery exception also did not apply, as police made no showing they were actively pursuing a warrant, and the girlfriend's later consent was tainted by the prior illegal search.
criminal lawprocedure
Peacock v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012-02-03 · cited 12×
Kate Peacock was charged with drug possession offenses and accepted a plea deal for a sentence of one year and one day in prison. After pleading no contest, she requested and received a furlough but failed to appear for sentencing because she was hospitalized following a suicide attempt. The trial court imposed a three-year prison sentence, finding her failure to appear willful despite her mental health history. On appeal, the court reversed, holding that the state failed to prove the failure to appear was willful and that the original negotiated sentence must be reinstated.
criminal lawprocedure
Reynolds v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011-11-09 · cited 3×
Bernard William Reynolds was convicted of selling cocaine after a jury trial in which a buyer identified as Valente could not identify Reynolds in court and no direct exchange of drugs or money was observed. Reynolds appealed the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal and the admission of a police officer's testimony that his leaning into a car was consistent with a drug transaction. The court affirmed the denial of acquittal, finding sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the conviction. However, it reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the officer's testimony about general criminal behavior was inadmissible to prove guilt and that the error was not harmless because the other evidence of the defendant's involvement was limited.
criminal lawprocedure
Dorsey v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011-10-19 · cited 30×
The case involved John Dorsey appealing his convictions for two counts of second degree murder, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and carrying a concealed firearm, which arose from a confrontation and shooting at a high school party. The appellate court affirmed the weapons convictions but reversed the second degree murder convictions after finding the evidence insufficient to show an act imminently dangerous to another evincing a depraved mind, as it instead established an impulsive overreaction to an attack that supported only manslaughter. The court also held that the trial court erred in its jury instructions on the justifiable use of deadly force and the duty to retreat under the Stand Your Ground law given the defendant's unlawful activity, and remanded for a new trial on manslaughter charges.
criminal lawguns
Santiago v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011-09-21 · cited 7×
Ivan Santiago appealed his conviction for possession of cocaine, a lesser-included offense of trafficking in cocaine, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal and in admitting Williams rule evidence of a prior drug sale at the same residence two weeks earlier. The evidence included testimony about the defendant's sale of crack cocaine to an undercover officer, his use of the nickname "Snow," and possession of a gun, which matched details from the search warrant execution where cocaine packages labeled "Snow" and a gun were found hidden in the home. The trial court admitted the prior incident evidence due to unique similarities and denied the acquittal motion, finding sufficient evidence of constructive possession through incriminating circumstances. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, concluding that the Williams rule evidence was relevant to establish knowledge and control over the drugs and that its admission did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
criminal law
Bell v. Bell
District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011-08-10 · cited 10×
This case involves the dissolution of a marriage between Jodie C. Bell and Mitchell K. Bell, with disputes over the equitable distribution of assets including business interests in Precision Time Systems and Royce, loans receivable from related entities, an inherited home, and a Ford Explorer, as well as the denial of bridge-the-gap alimony and attorney’s fees. The wife appealed the trial court’s calculations and lack of findings on alimony, while the husband cross-appealed the inclusion of nonmarital assets in the distribution. The appellate court reversed and remanded on the equalization payment, alimony findings, inherited home equity, and vehicle valuation, but affirmed the decision not to reserve jurisdiction on attorney’s fees. The reasoning centered on statutory classifications of nonmarital property under section 61.075, evidence that the home proceeds and car were nonmarital or nonexistent at dissolution, and the need for specific factual findings on alimony.
family lawproperty