final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for
Miami-Dade County Lower Tribunal No. 17-20880, Mark
Moody, Attorney General, and David Llanes, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellant.
Ocasio-Yrady, for appellee.
LINDSEY, HENDON and GORDO, JJ.
State of Florida appeals the trial court's order granting
Ariel Amaya's motion to suppress evidence obtained
pursuant to a traffic stop. Based on the trial court's
own pronouncement of the uncontroverted evidence, we reverse
and remand for findings consistent with an appropriate
application of Florida law.
& PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Amaya was stopped by City of Doral Detective Adam Andreozzi
for making an improper left turn in the intersection of
Northwest 58th Street and Northwest
79th Avenue in violation of section 316.151(1)(b),
Florida Statutes (2019). After further investigation, Mr.
Amaya was charged with unlawful conveyance of fuel, a
third-degree felony. He moved to suppress evidence
challenging the validity of the stop.
trial court held an evidentiary hearing, during which the
detective testified that Mr. Amaya exited the Mobil gas
station from the north side of the parking lot and made a
right turn on Northwest 58th Street. Northwest
58th Street is a four-lane road consisting of a
left turn lane, two through lanes, and a right turn lane. Mr.
Amaya was travelling in an eastbound, through lane, from
which he was not allowed to turn left. The detective then
observed Mr. Amaya make an abrupt left turn to travel north
on Northwest 79th Avenue from that through lane.
the trial court's questioning of the detective, he simply
recalled the turn was in violation of Chapter 316 and
admitted he did not know the specific statute number as he
did not issue a citation for the infraction. The transcript
reveals this inquiry led to an extensive dialogue between the
prosecutor and the court regarding the application of section
316.122, Florida Statutes (2019), which the State cited in
its response to the motion to suppress. While the State
argued that the facts amounted to a violation of section
316.122, the court disagreed. Nonetheless, the State
maintained that turning left from a non-turning lane was a
record, the court acknowledged the unrefuted testimony that
Mr. Amaya was travelling in a lane that was dedicated to
eastbound travel, stating: "He is in a lane that
doesn't make a left or right. I've got it." The
court found "[t]hat it is uncontroverted what lane [Mr.
Amaya] is in."
court orally found that the facts presented during the
evidentiary hearing did not constitute a traffic infraction
in violation of section 316.122, given there was no evidence
traffic was impacted by the turn. However, the State
subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration arguing that
Mr. Amaya's conduct violated section
316.151(1)(b). The court did not grant a hearing on the
motion, but instead issued a written order denying the motion
for reconsideration and granting the motion to suppress. In
it, the court ...