Id. In Pazos v. State, 654 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), the Fourth District determined that a search warrant was invalid based on section 933.18(5). There, a deputy sheriff executed an affidavit in support of a warrant application.
Id. at 984. See also Pazos v. State, 654 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (holding that the good faith exception to exclusionary rule applied to allow for the admission of cocaine seized from defendant's residence notwithstanding that the affidavit supporting the search warrant did not show probable cause that any law was then being violated in the dwelling; reliability of informant was demonstrated, there was controlled buy as well as prior drug dealings between informant and occupant of dwelling, officers had informant in sight constantly except while he was inside the dwelling, there was firm connection between contraband and the premises, there were no false statements or representations in the affidavit, and officers' reliance on magistrate's determination of probable cause was objectively reasonable). REVERSED and REMANDED.
The appellate courts in this state have never directly addressed this issue. In Pazos v. State, 654 So.2d 1000 (Fla.Ct.App.), review denied, 662 So.2d 932 (Fla. 1995), the Florida Court of Appeals upheld a search warrant under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule carved out in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1986). Before Florida's ruling, the Idaho Court of Appeals in State v. Wright, 115 Idaho 1043, 772 P.2d 250 (Idaho App. 1989), had held that the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied to an anticipatory search warrant issued without probable cause.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Pazos v. State, No. 93-3685, 654 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Pazos v. State, No. 93-3685, ___ So.2d ___ (Fla. 4th DCA May 10, 1995). GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.