Case ID: so2d_449/html/0369-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ronald Edward KAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 82-100.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 18, 1984.
    Rehearing Denied May 23, 1984.
    
      Harry M. Solomon and Joel Hirschhorn, Miami, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Russell S. Bohn, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s convictions of and sentences for delivery of methaqualone and possession of cocaine are affirmed.

Defendant’s contention that the police violated his right to privacy by utilizing a “body bug” in the defendant’s office is without merit. In Morningstar v. State, 428 So.2d 220 (Fla.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 86, 78 L.Ed.2d 95 (1983), the supreme court, finding section 934.03(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1979) constitutional, held that article 1, section 12 of the Florida Constitution does not prohibit a warrantless electronic interception of a defendant’s conversation by an undercover police officer in a defendant’s office or place of business. That holding compels our affirmance here.

Accordingly, the defendant’s convictions and sentences are affirmed.

GLICKSTEIN, HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.