Case Name: Robert MASTERS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1984-07-24
Citations: 453 So. 2d 183
Docket Number: No. 83-489
Parties: Robert MASTERS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUB-BART and NESBITT, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 453
Pages: 183–185

Head Matter:
Robert MASTERS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 83-489.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
July 24, 1984.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Marti Rothenberg, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Randi B. Klay-man, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUB-BART and NESBITT, JJ.

Opinion:
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
While the defendant's marijuana patch was located but forty feet from the side of his home, since it did not lie within a common fence or enclosure and was manifestly used for commercial rather than for family or domestic purposes associated with a dwelling, it cannot be deemed to have been within the "curtilage" of the home. Care v. United States, 231 F.2d 22 (10th Cir.1956), cert. denied, 351 U.S. 932, 76 S.Ct. 788, 100 L.Ed. 1461 (1956); Phillips v. State, 177 So.2d 243 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965); 25 C.J.S. Curtilage p. 81 (1966); see Oliver v. United States, — U.S. -, -, n. 12, 104 S.Ct. 1735, 1743, n. 12, 80 L.Ed.2d 214, 226, n. 12 (defining curtilage as "the area around the home to which the activity of home life extends.") Under the controlling authority of Oliver, the defendant was therefore not entitled to fourth amendment protection as to that area. On this basis, the challenged order denying suppression was correct, and the conviction for trafficking in cannibis is
Affirmed.