564 SO2D 1083 - State v. Jimeno

How this case has been cited

Cited by 145 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2010 · most notably Florida v. Jimeno (1991), 921 So. 2d 587 - Borden v. East-European Ins. Co. (2006)

2 federal appellate · 137 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Michael J. Neimand, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, for petitioner.

¶2Sidney Efronson and Ramon Tourgeman of the Law Offices of Sidney Efronson, Miami, for respondents.

¶3 *1084 GRIMES, Justice.

¶4We accepted jurisdiction^[1] to review State v. Jimeno,550 So.2d 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), wherein the district court of appeal certified as being of great public importance a question concerning the lawfulness of searching a closed container after consent has been given to search a motor vehicle for narcotics.

¶5We agree with respondents that under State v. Wells,539 So.2d 464 (Fla. 1989), aff'd, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 1632, 109 L.Ed.2d 1 (1990), the consent to search a vehicle does not extend to a closed container found inside the vehicle.

¶6Therefore, we approve the decision of the district court of appeal.

¶7It is so ordered.

¶8SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, BARKETT and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

¶9McDONALD, J., dissents.

NOTES

¶10[1] Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.