Florida Law on Consensual Encounters

Fourth Amendment protections are not unlimited. A consensual encounter, for example, is not considered a stop or a search and therefore, it is not constitutionally prohibited. They usually take place when law enforcement asks a citizen about something that deals with public safety or a citizen's safety. During the conversation, the citizen assumes he or she can end the discussion and leave at any time.

A court will look to the unique facts of the case to determine if a reasonable person would believe he or she was free to leave, to decide whether an encounter between a police officer and a citizen is consensual. An encounter will probably be considered to be consensual instead of a stop unless the law enforcement officer actually tries to prevent the citizen from walking away during the encounter. State v. Mitchell, 638 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1994).

An encounter will probably be considered as consensual unless the officer says something to indicate the citizen cannot walk away. State v. Starke, 574 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). However, the law does not require that the officer expressly tell the citizen he is free to decline cooperation. State v. Livingston, 681 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).

In the context of vehicle searches and seizures, Florida law also acknowledges the "community caretaking function." See e.g. Castella v. State, 959 So.2d 1285 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); State v. Patrick, 437 So.2d 217 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The community caretaker function of a law enforcement officer allows him or her to initiate contact with a citizen due to a duty to investigate, usually based on a concern for the health, well-being, or safety of a driver or other citizens.

Florida law treats the community caretaking function as wholly distinguished from law enforcement's duty to investigate a crime and acquire evidence related to a crime. Courts do not acknowledge that the community caretaking function for officers extents to warrantless searches of homes and residences. Ortiz v. State, 2009 WL 1097258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009).

A criminal defense attorney must be familiar with the latest case law on Fourth Amendment protections if the prosecutor raises an argument that the consensual encounter or community caretaking function theories prohibit the Fourth Amendment from protecting the defendant.

There are dozens, if not hundreds of cases that define what constitutes a stop as opposed to a consensual encounter. The nuances that distinguish these cases may be very subtle and the criminal defense lawyer must be able to understand and rely on the most analogous cases that will help the defendant in assisting the Court in ruling that Fourth Amendment protections apply.


------

Ryan Rooth is a Florida defense lawyer who can help you navigate through the intimidating world of criminal law. If you have been arrested for driving under the influence, claim your FREE e-book providing help on your Florida criminal case, available at => http://www.roothlawgroup.com