From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wright v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 8, 2000
766 So. 2d 467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Opinion

Case No. 1D99-3476

Opinion filed September 8, 2000.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County. G. Robert Barron, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and David A. Davis, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, Attorneys for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Daniel A. David, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Attorneys for Appellee.


Appellant, Billy Curtis Wright, appeals the trial court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence. At issue was Appellant's claim that he did not consent, or alternatively that he withdrew his consent, to a search of his person prior to the discovery of cocaine and paraphernalia in his pocket. At the evidentiary hearing the testimony of one of the officers was consistent with that of Appellant, i.e., Appellant tried to prevent the officer from searching his pocket. Although the trial court found generally that Appellant consented to the search, it failed to address whether Appellant withdrew his consent by grabbing his shirt pocket before the officer felt its contents.

Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND to the trial court to conduct a new hearing on the issue of whether Wright withdrew his consent to the search. See Phillips v. State, 707 So.2d 774 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

BOOTH and BENTON, JJ., and SHIVERS, DOUGLASS B., SENIOR JUDGE, CONCUR.


Summaries of

Wright v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 8, 2000
766 So. 2d 467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)
Case details for

Wright v. State

Case Details

Full title:BILLY CURTIS WRIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Sep 8, 2000

Citations

766 So. 2d 467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Benitez v. State

Because the trial court's order denying Benitez's motion to suppress and its failure to make critical Ramirez…

State v. Soloman

This issue involves mixed questions of fact and law and should be first addressed by the trial court. State…