CROSS v. STATE (2022)

From a final judgment of conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, appellant challenges the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Appellant alleges an improper warrantless search of his backpack. We affirm the trial court's determination that the agents conducted a proper inventory search.

“[W]hen reviewing a ruling on a motion to suppress, an appellate court presumes the trial court's findings of fact are correct and reverses only those findings not supported by competent substantial evidence.” Black v. State, 59 So. 3d 340, 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (quoting Pierre v. State, 22 So. 3d 759, 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)). We defer to the trial court's findings, which we conclude are supported by the evidence. The search substantially complied with the sheriff's policy of procedures as testified to by the agents. That some personal items discovered in the search were returned to appellant's girlfriend does not vitiate the inventory search, as the agents testified that the return of such property was permitted in their discretion under the sheriff's department policy.

Affirmed.

Per Curiam.

Warner, Levine and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.