EP v. State, 997 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
EP v. State, 997 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (13 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: L.C. v. State (fladistctapp, 2009-11-12)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) L.C. v. State (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
See Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85, 93 , 100 S.Ct. 338 , 62 L.Ed.2d 238 (1979) (“[A] law enforcement officer, for his own protection and safety, may conduct a patdown to find weapons that he reasonably believes or suspects are then in the possession of the person he has accosted.”); United States v. McCargo, 464 F.3d 192, 202 (2d Cir.2006) (“[I]n cases where the police may lawfully transport a suspect to the scene of the crime in the rear of a police car, the police may carry out a departmental policy, imposed for reasons of officer safety, by patting down that person.”); United State…
discussed Cited "see" DO v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See E.P. v. State, 997 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (citing Jackson v. State, 791 P.2d 1023 (Alaska Ct.App.1990) ("in the case of transportation in a *788 police vehicle, however, or in the analogous circumstances here, the necessity of close proximity will itself provide the needed basis for a protective pat-down of the person"), In re Kelsey, 243 Wis.2d 422 , 626 N.W.2d 777 (2001), and State v. Evans, 67 Ohio St.3d 405 , 618 N.E.2d 162 (1993)).
discussed Cited "see" D.O. v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See E.P. v. State, 997 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (citing Jackson v. State, 791 P.2d 1023 (Alaska Ct.App. 1990)(“in the case of transportation in a police vehicle, however, or in the analogous circumstances here, the necessity of close proximity will itself provide the needed basis for a protective pat-down of the person”), In re Kelsey, 243 Wis.2d 422 , 626 N.W.2d 777 (2001), and State v. Evans, 67 Ohio St.3d 405 , 618 N.E.2d 162 (1993)).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Ago
Fla. Att'y Gen. · 2011 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare E.P. v. State , 997 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), which was cited by the court in L.C. and in which the court found that "no error has been demonstrated in the denial of a motion to suppress drug paraphernalia found on the juvenile's person after a pat down which followed a Terry stop justified under section 984.13 , Florida Statutes (2007) . . . and justifiably preceded placing him in the police car for the purpose of taking him to school as the statute requires." 11 Citing Knowles v. Iowa , 525 U.S. 113 , 117 , 119 S.Ct. 484 , 142 L.
E.P., a juvenile, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
3D07-2879.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Dec 31, 2008.
997 So. 2d 1240
Cope and Rothenberg, Jj., and Schwartz, Senior Judge.
Published
Pinpoint authority: bottom 48%

Bennett H. Brummer, Miami, and Gwendolyn Powell Braswell, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Nikole Hiciano, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE and ROTHENBERG, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

In this appeal from an adjudication of delinquency, no error has been demonstrated in the denial of a motion to suppress drug paraphernalia found on the juvenile's person after a pat down which followed a Terry stop justified under section 984.13, Florida Statutes (2007) ("when the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the child is absent from school without authorization ... for the purpose of delivering the child without unreasonable delay to the appropriate school system site"), see K.A.C. v. State, 707 So.2d 1175 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), and justifiably preceded placing him in the police car for the purpose of taking him to school as the statute requires. See, e.g., Jackson v. State, 791 P.2d 1023 (Alaska Ct.App. 1990)("in the case of transportation in a police vehicle, however, or in the analogous circumstances here, the necessity of close proximity will itself provide the needed basis for a protective pat-down of the person."). See also In re Kelsey, 243 Wis.2d 422, 626 N.W.2d 777 (2001); State v. Evans, 67 Ohio St.3d 405, 618 N.E.2d 162 (1993).

Affirmed.