Case Name: Joseph H. PADGETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1981-09-17
Citations: 404 So. 2d 151
Docket Number: No. YY-495
Parties: Joseph H. PADGETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: BOOTH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 404
Pages: 151–152

Head Matter:
Joseph H. PADGETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. YY-495.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Sept. 17, 1981.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 22, 1981.
Ronald A. Dion, Entin, Schwartz, Angert, Dion & Broudy, North Miami Beach, Clyde M. Taylor, Jr., Tallahassee, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., David P. Gauldin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Opinion:
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Appellant seeks review of a judgment of conviction and sentence imposed for the offense of unlawful compensation, § 838.-016, Florida Statutes. We affirm the order appealed.
Among other contentions, appellant alleges error based upon the court's denial of a motion to suppress tape recordings made from the warrantless interception, pursuant to § 934.03(2)(c), Florida Statutes, of conversations between appellant and a police informant. The tapes include conversations which occurred in a motel room appellant used in furtherance of his illegal activity. The record indicates that upon being contacted at his private residence appellant arranged meetings at the motel room.
Article I, § 12, Florida Constitution, precludes the warrantless interception of private conversations conducted in the subject's home. State v. Sarmiento, 397 So.2d 643 (Fla.1981); also see Hoberman v. State, 400 So.2d 758 (Fla.1981). However, in the circumstances of the present case we reject appellant's suggestion that his motel room was the "functional equivalent" of a home, and we thus conclude that Sarmiento and Hoberman are inapplicable in this instance.
The order appealed is affirmed.
BOOTH and SHAW, JJ., concur.