Case Name: Martin Christopher LaCHANCE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1979-11-15
Citations: 376 So. 2d 932
Docket Number: No. 77-1919
Parties: Martin Christopher LaCHANCE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: LETTS, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 376
Pages: 932–935

Head Matter:
Martin Christopher LaCHANCE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 77-1919.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Nov. 15, 1979.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Larry S. Weaver, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and John D. Cecilian, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
BERANEK, Judge.
Defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress contending basically that the affidavit supporting a search warrant was inadequate and contained untrue statements.
We have examined the affidavit and application for a search warrant here under attack and while it is no model document, we believe it sufficiently states probable cause. As the Supreme Court of the United States has said, "A policeman's affidavit 'should not be judged as an entry in an essay contest,' . . .We conclude that the affidavit in the present case contains an ample factual basis for believing the informant." United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 579, 91 S.Ct. 2075, 2080, 29 L.Ed.2d 723 (1971).
We further do not agree with appellant's arguments that the policeman's affi davit contained proven untruths, tended examination the officer sufficiently explained his word usage so that his credibility was not destroyed and the trial court made no finding of untruthfulness. The transcript of the hearing shows the court in fact believed the testimony of the officer. The judgment below is affirmed. In ex-
AFFIRMED.
LETTS, J., concurs.
DAUKSCH, J., dissents.