Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

634 So. 2d 302

State v. Rivera

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1994-03-31

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1996

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-03-31

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DAUKSCH, Judge,

¶1dissenting.

¶2I respectfully dissent.

¶3I agree with the trial judge that the affidavit for the search warrant was deficient. There was no direct evidence or allegation in the affidavit that any drugs were in the premises to be searched. There was a drug sale at the Lancaster Market, not the address to be searched, and there was a nexus between the drug salesman and the searched premises but there was not sufficient probable cause stated in the affidavit to show that drugs would be found there when searched.

¶4While all the activity at the premises was suspicious to the police, and their instincts obviously told them they would find drugs there, upon a cold distant reading of the affidavit (much of which is in boiler-plate language) there was not a probable cause case made.

¶5I would affirm.

/634/so2d/302 · .json · Public domain