Contact Me for a Free Consultation (941) 257-5003

Blog

Search and seizure, Traffic stop Motion to Suppress should have been granted

Posted by John P. Rutkowski | Apr 25, 2020 | 0 Comments

Search and seizure, Traffic stop, Search of vehicle subsequent to traffic stop during which officer detected the odor of marijuana. The trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to suppress where traffic stop for a broken tail light was unlawful. Section of chapter 316 that enumerates the requirements for tail lights does not prohibit the operation of a vehicle with a non-functioning tail light where there are two other fully operational lights. The evidence indisputably established that defendant's vehicle had two operational rear brake lights. For the stop to have been lawful the broken tail light must have posed a safety hazard, and state failed to present a particularized basis to suspect the vehicle was unsafe. It is not objectively reasonable to believe that a vehicle with a single broken tail light emitting some amount of white light would be unsafe where vehicle had two additional operating brake lights.

Read Entire Opinion Below:

About the Author

John P. Rutkowski

Mr. Rutkowski has been practicing law for the past twenty-four years. Prior to going to law school Mr. Rutkowski served as a deputy sheriff before retiring to attend law school. Upon graduating law school Mr. Rutkowski served as a prosecutor in Florida before going in to private practice.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Contact us

John P. Rutkowski, Attorney at Law, is focused on all aspects of Criminal Defense, State and Federal Courts, Post Conviction Relief, Criminal Appeals and Traffic Offenses. Contact me today for a free telephone consultation.

Menu