Case Name: Joseph Wayne LOFTEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1965-03-30
Citations: 173 So. 2d 157
Docket Number: No. 64-404
Parties: Joseph Wayne LOFTEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, C. J., and TILLMAN PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 173
Pages: 157–157

Head Matter:
Joseph Wayne LOFTEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 64-404.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
March 30, 1965.
Robert L. Koeppel, Public Defender and Phillip Hubbart, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Arden Siegendorf, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, C. J., and TILLMAN PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, defendant in the trial court, seeks review of an adverse jury verdict and judgment of conviction thereon, finding the appellant guilty of breaking and entering a dwelling and of grand larceny.
The principal point relied on for reversal is that the trial court erred in failing to grant the motion to suppress certain evidence. The reasonableness of the search incident to a lawful arrest is a question for determination by a trial court. See: Haile v. Gardner, 82 Fla. 355, 91 So. 376; Longo v. State, 157 Fla. 668, 26 So.2d 818; Starks v. State, Fla.App.1959, 108 So.2d 788. Examining the record on appeal in the instant case in light of this principle, it is apparent that the search was reasonable under the circumstances. See: James v. State, Fla.1955, 80 So.2d 699; Gaskins v. State, Fla.1956, 89 So.2d 867.
Therefore, the judgment and conviction here under review is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.