Court Opinion

ID: 7533508
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 05:14:43.456502+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:23:44.570027
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s convictions of and sentences for delivery of methaqualone and possession of cocaine are affirmed.
Defendant’s contention that the police violated his right to privacy by utilizing a “body bug” in the defendant’s office is without merit. In Morningstar v. State, 428 So.2d 220 (Fla.1982), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 86, 78 L.Ed.2d 95 (1983), the supreme court, finding section 934.03(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1979) constitutional, held that article 1, section 12 of the Florida Constitution does not prohibit a warrantless electronic interception of a defendant’s conversation by an undercover police officer in a defendant’s office or place of business. That holding compels our affirmance here.
Accordingly, the defendant’s convictions and sentences are affirmed.
GLICKSTEIN, HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.