Supreme Court of Florida Requires the Prosecution to Provide All Documents and Information Necessary

Supreme Court Of Florida Requires The Prosecution To Provide All Documents And Information Necessary

The Florida Supreme Courtexplained that the factthat a drug dog has ...More
The Florida Supreme Courtexplained that the factthat a drug dog has beenproperly trained &certified to detectillegal drugs standingalone, is insufficient toestablish the reliabilityof the dog. The court'sruling resolved aconflict between the 1stDistrict Court of Appealin the matter of Harrisvs. State of Florida, aswell as opinions of theSecond District Court ofAppeal in the case Gibsonvs. State & Mathesonvs. State of Florida. Less

Supreme Court of Florida Requires the Prosecution to Provide All Documents and Information Necessary

to get instant updates about 'Supreme Court Of Florida Requires The Prosecution To Provide All Documents And Information Necessary' on your MyPage. Meet other similar minded people. Its Free!

X 

All Updates


Overview:
The Florida Supreme Court explained that the fact that a drug dog has been properly trained & certified to locate illegal narcotics standing alone, is insufficient to demonstrate the reliability of the drug dog. This decision resolved a longstanding conflict between the 1st District Court of Appeal in the case of Harris v. State of Florida, and opinions of the Second District of Gibson v. State of Florida & Matheson vs. State of Florida.
Description:

In the case of Harris v. The State of Florida|State}, in a revised ruling on rehearing denial, the supreme court ruled that the state met its burden of establishing probable cause to search a automobile by demonstrating that an officer reasonably believed a drug dog to be reliable in view of the totality of the circumstances. The Supreme Court stated that the fact that a drug-detection K-9 has been trained and certified to locate illegal drugs in and of itself, is not sufficient to demonstrate the dog's reliability. The court's ruling resolved a conflict between the 1st District in the case of Harris v. State, as well as decisions out of the Second District Court of Appeal in Gibson vs. State & Matheson vs. State of Florida.

In Harris, the state charged defendant with possession of the scheduled chemical pseudoephedrine with the intent to utilize it to make methamphetamine, commonly known as meth, in violation of Florida Statute 893.149(1)(a). Defendant made a motion to suppress the seized evidence, arguing that it was found via to an unlawful search of his vehicle which was a result from an alert on the vehicle by a drug-detection K-9. Defendant introduced evidence that dog was unreliable because the same dog had also alerted on the defendant's vehicle in an unrelated traffic stop which was for a traffic infraction, & a subsequent search revealed only an open bottle of liquor &and no illegal narcotics.

The lower court denied the motion to suppress, but made no finding as to the drug dog's reliability. On appeal, the First District Court of Appeal in Harris issued an opinion stating that the State of Florida can demonstrate probable cause for a search of a vehicle by demonstrating that a dog is properly trained and certified to detect illegal drugs. The Florida Supreme court quashed Harris and approved the decision in Matheson, ruling that if the trial court, while hearing a motion to suppress, relies on training and certification records & doesn't to consider additional factors concerning the dog's performance, then the trial court doesn't have a complete picture of the wide variety of factors that bear on the reasonableness of an officer's belief in a dog's reliability & whether an alert in a particular case provides an indication of a fair probability that there are illegal drugs present inside the vehicle. Accordingly, the prosecution must present all documents & records necessary to allow the circuit court to evaluate the dog's reliability.

For more information concerning Criminal Attorney Miami FL , DUI Attorney and DUI Attorney please contact us at: The Law Offices of Rosenberg and Dye 201 South Biscayne Boulevard

28th Floor

Miami, FL 33131

(305)429-3285

All
Posting your question. Please wait!...


About

The Florida Supreme Court explained that the fact that a drug dog has been properly trained & certified to detect illegal drugs standing alone, is insufficient to establish the reliability of the dog. The court's ruling resolved a conflict between the 1st District Court of Appeal in the matter of Harris vs. State of Florida, as well as opinions of the Second District Court of Appeal in the case Gibson vs. State & Matheson vs. State of Florida.
No messages found
Suggested Pages
Tell your friends >
about this page
 Create a new Page
for companies, colleges, celebrities or anything you like.Get updates on MyPage.
Create a new Page
 Find your friends
  Find friends on MyPage from