From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Windes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 15, 1989
547 So. 2d 346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Opinion

No. 88-77.

August 15, 1989.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Margarita Esquiroz, J.

C. Craig Stella, Fort Lauderdale, and Russell B. Adler, Davie, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen. and Joan L. Greenberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ.


We hold that the positive dog-sniff of a package in the defendant's car was constitutionally permissible as the subject of a valid consent given after the defendant was told he had the right to refuse. This fact renders constitutionally inconsequential the apparent illegalities in the detention of the defendant which preceded the consent and search. See State v. Gribeiro, 513 So.2d 1323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Husted v. State, 370 So.2d 853 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Hence, the motion to suppress the cocaine found in the package was properly denied.

The remaining points are without merit and require no discussion.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Windes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 15, 1989
547 So. 2d 346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)
Case details for

Windes v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAMES PAUL WINDES, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 15, 1989

Citations

547 So. 2d 346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Citing Cases

State v. Paul

Norman; State v. Boyd, 615 So.2d 786 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); West; Reed v. State, 577 So.2d 1362 (Fla. 2d DCA…