Possession of Marijuana Cases in Florida can be successfully attacked when a Criminal Defense Lawyer takes depositions and files motions. The most important motion known to a Criminal Attorney handling drug cases is that of a Motion to Suppress. A Motion to Suppress is where a defendant claims in writing that the police made mistakes in the handling of the case and as a result of those mistakes certain evidence should be suppressed / thrown out. There are always mistakes in criminal cases but the idea is to find mistakes that are dispositive. When a drug crimes lawyer refers to a dispositive motion it means that if granted that the amount of evidence suppressed (thrown out) would make it impossible for the prosecution to go forward in the prosecution of the defendant.
Below is a Motion to Suppress that was successful a few years ago. The names of individuals and basic facts have been changed to keep basic information confidential. The purpose of sharing this is so the non-lawyer may understand that there are issues that may be attacked in his case. The facts of this particular case involve a police officer who stopped the defendant based on a hunch. Although the police officer’s hunch was correct, it was illegal and we were able to win the case. If you are arrested for drug charges it is important for you to know the basic processes involved in fighting your case. All Lawyers are not created equal so be sure to ask your Florida Criminal Lawyer whether he is taking depositions, whether he has filed any motions, and based on the case law whether there are any dispositive issues in your case.
COMES NOW, the Defendant, JOHN SMITH, by and through his undersigned counsel, and moves this Honorable Court, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(h)(1)(A), to suppress any and all evidence obtained as a result of an illegal traffic stop, and as grounds therefore states the following:
I. The defendant was charged by information with a single count of Possession of Marijuana on March 15th, 2007.
II. Officer Herpes indicates in his Arrest Affidavit that the sole basis for the investigatory stop was that defendant tried to conceal himself from the Officer by squatting down inside his parked vehicle.
III. At the time of the investigatory stop, Defendant’s vehicle was legally parked on the side of the road.
IV. Officer Herpes alleges that he made a routine traffic stop of a vehicle that was legally parked and not in operation. The Defendant had not committed a traffic infraction.
V. During his deposition, Officer Herpes, indicated that the main reason he stopped the defendant was because the defendant tried to conceal himself when the officer drove by in his marked patrol vehicle.
VI. Officer Herpes had a “hunch” or “gut feeling” that the defendant was up to no good or that a crime was being committed.
VII. As a result of the illegal stop, Officer Herpes observed several prescription bottles inside the vehicle; one bottle containing several marijuana cigarettes. The Defendant was subsequently given a arrested for Possession of Marijuana.
The Supreme Court of Florida has held that “stopping an automobile and detaining its occupants constitutes a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” State v. Jones, 483 So.2d 433, 435 (Fla. 1986). A vehicle stop is lawful if it is predicated on a founded or reasonable suspicion, that requires further investigation to determine whether the occupants of the vehicle have committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime. Popple v. State, 626 So.2d 185 (Fla. 1993); Batson v. State, 847 So. 2d 1149, 1150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Such suspicion must be articulable and based on objective facts. Id. Behavior which may be suspicious but not demonstrably or conceivably criminal is not sufficient to establish founded suspicion for stop, even in a high crime area. Hills v. State, 629 So.2d 152 (Fla.1993). At bar, the defendant did not commit any traffic violation or crime that would give Officer Herpes probable cause to make an investigatory, however, Officer Herpes states in the Arrest Affidavit, that he was making a routine traffic stop.
When an investigatory traffic stop is not based on reasonable suspicion, it violates the Fourth Amendment and is unlawful, making evidence obtained as a result of the stop inadmissible as “fruit of the poisonous tree .” Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 484, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963). The officer, in this case, had absolutely no reason to stop the defendant. The defendant’s vehicle was parked legally on the side of the road and there were no visual infractions observed by the officer.
Whether there is reasonable suspicion for a stop depends on the totality of the circumstances. Walker v. State, 846 So. 2d 643, 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Grant v. State, 718 So. 2d 238, 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); State v. Kibbee, 513 So. 2d 256, 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). At bar, there is one reason that Officer Herpes stopped the defendant and that was because he believed that the defendant ducked down or tried to conceal himself when the officer passed by in his cruiser. As a result, Officer Herpes became suspicious that something was not right or that a crime was being committed. In Belsky v. State, 831 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), the court held that bare suspicion or a mere “hunch” that criminal activity may be occurring is not sufficient. Similarly, here, we argue that Officer Hernandez did not have reasonable suspicion to do an investigatory stop of the Defendant-he stopped the Defendant based on a hunch. The defendant’s car was legally parked on the side of the road in Broward County. Furthermore, the defendant was not committing a traffic violation nor could the police officer determine that a crime was taking place based on the totality of circumstances. Even if, as stated by the officer, the Defendant tried to “hide or conceal himself” the officer would still lack reasonable suspicion to begin an investigation.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, JOHN SMITH, respectfully moves this Court to suppress any and all physical and testimonial evidence obtained which relates to the defendant on the night of his arrest including but not limited to any statements made by the defendant to the Officer, any observations of the defendant by any officer, and all other evidence obtained as a result of his unlawful seizure, more specifically the seizure of marijuana.
Now you have seen a basic motion to suppress by a Broward Criminal Defense Lawyer who handles Drug Crimes in Broward. This Motion led to all charges being dismissed against the defendant. Whether you are charged with Possession of Marijuana in Broward, Cultivation of Marijuana, or Drug Trafficking of Marijuana in Broward County, you should contact a Criminal Defense Attorney with experience in handling all drug crimes. Remember you can choose who is on your defense team. Ask questions of your criminal lawyer and make sure he is capable of properly defending drug cases in Broward County. No criminal lawyer can give you a guarantee but they can give you basic information about the process and tell you if the case law is on your side. Ask questions and never assume anything. Mr. Foley meets with prospective clients for a free consultation.
Mr. Foley is a Christian Lawyer and is available to speak at your church or group organization meeting. Mr. Foley is a guest lecturer at schools, churches, and other organization wherein individuals wish to further understand their rights in the community. Mr. Foley can be reached at 954 467-2946
Below is a Motion to Suppress that was successful a few years ago. The names of individuals and basic facts have been changed to keep basic information confidential. The purpose of sharing this is so the non-lawyer may understand that there are issues that may be attacked in his case. The facts of this particular case involve a police officer who stopped the defendant based on a hunch. Although the police officer’s hunch was correct, it was illegal and we were able to win the case. If you are arrested for drug charges it is important for you to know the basic processes involved in fighting your case. All Lawyers are not created equal so be sure to ask your Florida Criminal Lawyer whether he is taking depositions, whether he has filed any motions, and based on the case law whether there are any dispositive issues in your case.
MOTION TO SUPPRESS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
COMES NOW, the Defendant, JOHN SMITH, by and through his undersigned counsel, and moves this Honorable Court, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(h)(1)(A), to suppress any and all evidence obtained as a result of an illegal traffic stop, and as grounds therefore states the following:
THE FACTS
I. The defendant was charged by information with a single count of Possession of Marijuana on March 15th, 2007.
II. Officer Herpes indicates in his Arrest Affidavit that the sole basis for the investigatory stop was that defendant tried to conceal himself from the Officer by squatting down inside his parked vehicle.
III. At the time of the investigatory stop, Defendant’s vehicle was legally parked on the side of the road.
IV. Officer Herpes alleges that he made a routine traffic stop of a vehicle that was legally parked and not in operation. The Defendant had not committed a traffic infraction.
V. During his deposition, Officer Herpes, indicated that the main reason he stopped the defendant was because the defendant tried to conceal himself when the officer drove by in his marked patrol vehicle.
VI. Officer Herpes had a “hunch” or “gut feeling” that the defendant was up to no good or that a crime was being committed.
VII. As a result of the illegal stop, Officer Herpes observed several prescription bottles inside the vehicle; one bottle containing several marijuana cigarettes. The Defendant was subsequently given a arrested for Possession of Marijuana.
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
The Supreme Court of Florida has held that “stopping an automobile and detaining its occupants constitutes a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” State v. Jones, 483 So.2d 433, 435 (Fla. 1986). A vehicle stop is lawful if it is predicated on a founded or reasonable suspicion, that requires further investigation to determine whether the occupants of the vehicle have committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime. Popple v. State, 626 So.2d 185 (Fla. 1993); Batson v. State, 847 So. 2d 1149, 1150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Such suspicion must be articulable and based on objective facts. Id. Behavior which may be suspicious but not demonstrably or conceivably criminal is not sufficient to establish founded suspicion for stop, even in a high crime area. Hills v. State, 629 So.2d 152 (Fla.1993). At bar, the defendant did not commit any traffic violation or crime that would give Officer Herpes probable cause to make an investigatory, however, Officer Herpes states in the Arrest Affidavit, that he was making a routine traffic stop.
When an investigatory traffic stop is not based on reasonable suspicion, it violates the Fourth Amendment and is unlawful, making evidence obtained as a result of the stop inadmissible as “fruit of the poisonous tree .” Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 484, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963). The officer, in this case, had absolutely no reason to stop the defendant. The defendant’s vehicle was parked legally on the side of the road and there were no visual infractions observed by the officer.
Whether there is reasonable suspicion for a stop depends on the totality of the circumstances. Walker v. State, 846 So. 2d 643, 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Grant v. State, 718 So. 2d 238, 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); State v. Kibbee, 513 So. 2d 256, 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). At bar, there is one reason that Officer Herpes stopped the defendant and that was because he believed that the defendant ducked down or tried to conceal himself when the officer passed by in his cruiser. As a result, Officer Herpes became suspicious that something was not right or that a crime was being committed. In Belsky v. State, 831 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), the court held that bare suspicion or a mere “hunch” that criminal activity may be occurring is not sufficient. Similarly, here, we argue that Officer Hernandez did not have reasonable suspicion to do an investigatory stop of the Defendant-he stopped the Defendant based on a hunch. The defendant’s car was legally parked on the side of the road in Broward County. Furthermore, the defendant was not committing a traffic violation nor could the police officer determine that a crime was taking place based on the totality of circumstances. Even if, as stated by the officer, the Defendant tried to “hide or conceal himself” the officer would still lack reasonable suspicion to begin an investigation.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, JOHN SMITH, respectfully moves this Court to suppress any and all physical and testimonial evidence obtained which relates to the defendant on the night of his arrest including but not limited to any statements made by the defendant to the Officer, any observations of the defendant by any officer, and all other evidence obtained as a result of his unlawful seizure, more specifically the seizure of marijuana.
Now you have seen a basic motion to suppress by a Broward Criminal Defense Lawyer who handles Drug Crimes in Broward. This Motion led to all charges being dismissed against the defendant. Whether you are charged with Possession of Marijuana in Broward, Cultivation of Marijuana, or Drug Trafficking of Marijuana in Broward County, you should contact a Criminal Defense Attorney with experience in handling all drug crimes. Remember you can choose who is on your defense team. Ask questions of your criminal lawyer and make sure he is capable of properly defending drug cases in Broward County. No criminal lawyer can give you a guarantee but they can give you basic information about the process and tell you if the case law is on your side. Ask questions and never assume anything. Mr. Foley meets with prospective clients for a free consultation.
Mr. Foley is a Christian Lawyer and is available to speak at your church or group organization meeting. Mr. Foley is a guest lecturer at schools, churches, and other organization wherein individuals wish to further understand their rights in the community. Mr. Foley can be reached at 954 467-2946
Now that your list should have only a few candidates remaining you should ask these lawyers for references. Check these references see what these people have to say about the lawyer and how they handled their individual case. Knowing how they handled cases similar to yours should be of great value to you. Make sure you are treated with common courtesy from the lawyer and the other staff at the firm. The Hawaii Criminal Lawyers OR Hawaii DUI should have complete total knowledge of the law of the state they represent.
ReplyDelete