Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Officer Trujillo, overheard Enio Jimeno (D), arranging what appeared to be a drug transaction over a public telephone. Trujillo followed Ds' car. The officer observed Ds make a right turn at a red light without stopping. He then pulled Ds over to the side of the road in order to issue him a traffic citation. Trujillo told D that he had been stopped for committing a traffic infraction. The officer added that he had reason to believe that D was carrying narcotics in his car, and asked permission to search the car. He explained that d did not have to consent to a search of the car. D stated that he had nothing to hide and gave Trujillo permission to search the automobile. After D's spouse, respondent Luz Jimeno (D), stepped out of the car, Trujillo went to the passenger side, opened the door, and saw a folded, brown paper bag on the floorboard. The officer picked up the bag, opened it, and found a kilogram of cocaine inside. Ds moved to suppress the cocaine found in the bag on the ground that Jimeno's consent to search the car did not extend to the closed paper bag inside of the car. The trial court granted the motion. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed. That court established a per se rule that 'consent to a general search for narcotics does not extend to 'sealed containers within the general area agreed to by the defendant.'' The Florida Supreme Court affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co