Case ID: so2d_497/html/1320-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. JORGENSON, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

W.R.A., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 85-1808.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Nov. 25, 1986.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and N. Joseph Durant, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
    Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Michael J. Neimand, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The respondent-appellant was adjudicated delinquent based on a finding that he had carried a concealed firearm. We reverse because, as the state has itself all but formally conceded, the officer’s pat down of W.R.A.’s person, which revealed the weapon, was supported neither by a founded suspicion that he was involved in criminal activity, State v. Levin, 452 So.2d 562 (Fla.1984), affirming, 449 So.2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Mullins v. State, 366 So.2d 1162 (Fla.1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 883, 100 S.Ct. 173, 62 L.Ed.2d 113; Hudnell v. State, 449 So.2d 930 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), nor by a reasonable belief that he was armed. See Redfin v. State, 453 So.2d 425 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Baldwin v. State, 418 So.2d 1219 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). The firearm in question should therefore have been suppressed.

Reversed.

SCHWARTZ, C.J., and DANIEL S. PEARSON, J., concur.

JORGENSON, Judge,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent.

I believe there is record support for the trial court’s conclusion that the discovery of the firearm was inadvertent.

I would affirm.