Case ID: so2d_411/html/0341-01.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

STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Steven William EMERY, Appellee.
    No. 81-115.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    March 24, 1982.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Laura R. Morrison, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Anthony Calvello, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Defendant Emery was not subjected to a sham or pretextual arrest. Moreover, it is legally certain that the arresting officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant for a misdemeanor committed in his presence before he removed certain items protruding from the defendant’s pocket. Consequently, it is irrelevant that the officer did not announce his intent to arrest until after he removed the items. Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98, 100 S.Ct. 2556, 65 L.Ed.2d 633 (1980); Thomas v. State, 395 So.2d 280 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); State v. Forbes, 353 So.2d 638 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Dixon v. State, 343 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977).

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order suppressing evidence and remand the cause for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., concur. 
      
      . § 877.03, Fla.Stat. (1979).