State v. Neeley

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 8, 1989

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1989-09-08

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 1999

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“IF A MOTOR VEHICLE IS LAWFULLY STOPPED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE DRIVER CONSENTS TO THE OFFICER'S LOOKING INSIDE THE VEHICLE, DOES THE CONSENT GIVEN EXTEND TO THE SEARCH OF CLOSED CONTAINERS WITHIN THE VEHICLE WHICH ARE NEITHER LOCKED NOR SEALED?”

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Jacobs v. State, 557 So. 2d 212 - Wallace v. State

Relies on State v. Abrams

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1989-09-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PARKER, Judge.

¶1The state appeals a trial court’s order granting a motion to suppress cocaine seized from an automobile. We affirm and certify a question to the supreme court.

¶2Katrina Neeley is a codefendant of Michael Abrams, whose case was decided this date by this court. See State v. Abrams, 548 So.2d 820 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), for a review of the facts and legal issues involved in both cases.

¶3We affirm the trial court but, as in Abrams, certify the following question of great public importance to the supreme court:

IF A MOTOR VEHICLE IS LAWFULLY STOPPED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE DRIVER CONSENTS TO THE OFFICER LOOKING INSIDE THE VEHICLE, DOES THE CONSENT GIVEN EXTEND TO THE SEARCH OF CLOSED CONTAINERS WITHIN THE VEHICLE WHICH ARE NEITHER LOCKED NOR SEALED?

¶4Affirmed.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.