Court Opinion

ID: 7602449
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 07:04:04.980473+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:24:49.375694
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
We affirm the denial of defendant’s motion to suppress cocaine found from a search of his person after his arrest for trespass. The search was valid as having been incident to a lawful arrest. See Moreland v. State, 552 So.2d 937, 939 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), review denied, 562 So.2d 346 (1990). An arrest need only be supported by probable cause, see, e.g., Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200, 208, 99 S.Ct. 2248, 2254, 60 L.Ed.2d 824, 833 (1979), not necessarily a prima facie case. See Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 419, 89 S.Ct. 584, 590, 21 L.Ed.2d 637, 645 (1969) (“[0]nly the probability, and not a prima facie showing, of criminal activity is the standard of probable cause....”) (quoted in Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 235, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 2330, 76 L.Ed.2d 527, 546 (1983)).
Affirmed.
RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and BLUE, JJ., concur.