FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-0083

No. 1D2023-0085

_____________________________

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellant,

v.

ROBERT LEE DENNARD III,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the County Court for Gadsden County.

Kathy J. Garner, Judge.

May 22, 2024

WINOKUR, J.

Robert Lee Dennard III was arrested for driving under the 

influence (DUI) and cited with a traffic violation. After Dennard 

successfully moved to suppress dispositive evidence, the State filed 

this appeal. We reverse. 

On December 14, 2019, Dennard was stopped by an officer of 

the Quincy Police Department. The officer observed Dennard 

failing to maintain his lane of traffic and going over the center lane 

and fog line on the road. After observing Dennard’s behavior, the 

officer conducted a traffic stop and immediately deduced that 

Dennard was driving while impaired.
2

Dennard was cited for failing to maintain his traffic lane, 

driving with a suspended license, and DUI. He was later charged

with DUI and driving with a suspended license. However, Dennard 

never proceeded to trial because he moved to suppress all the 

evidence obtained from his traffic stop. The trial court held an 

evidentiary hearing on the motion, where it heard testimony from 

Dennard and the arresting officer. The court orally announced its 

ruling, stating that “[a]fter hearing testimony of the witnesses, 

argument of the attorneys, this Court finds that the State has not 

met its burden by clear and convincing evidence. As a result, this 

Court grants the defense’s motion to suppress.” A similarly 

inadequate written order was later entered. This appeal followed. 

The State argues that the trial court’s failure to provide 

factual findings, either orally or in writing, to support its 

conclusion in granting a dispositive motion to suppress was 

erroneous. We agree. 

We review a trial court’s findings of fact for competent, 

substantial evidence and the legal conclusions de novo. See Tyson 

v. State, 351 So. 3d 1184, 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022). But when a 

trial court fails to provide an adequate record from which this 

Court can conduct its review, we must reverse. See State v. Moore, 

791 So. 2d 1246, 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (citing State v. Shaw, 

784 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)).*

Accordingly, the trial court’s order granting Dennard’s motion 

to suppress is REVERSED and REMANDED for the trial court to 

explain on the record its factual findings.

* In making this decision, we note that “[a] seizure for a traffic 

violation justifies a police investigation of that violation.” 

Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348, 354 (2015).
3

LEWIS and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Robert “Charlie” Lee, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee; Jack Campbell, State 

Attorney, Tallahassee, and Caroline M. Nelson, Assistant State 

Attorney, Quincy, for Appellant.

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Justin F. Karpf, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellee.