Case Study: Montana V. Montana

456 Words2 Pages
QUESTION PRESENTED Was the weapon, 40 caliber semiautomatic handgun, concealed in the driver’s side door panel? BRIEF ANSWER Weapon was probably not concealed. Officer clearly saw the uncovered weapon in the driver’s door panel. FACTS Our client, Tony Montana, is being charged with weapon concealment by the state of Florida. Montana and his wife stayed in Intracontinental hotel in Downtown Miami on July 4th, 2015. They were drinking alcohol and consuming cocaine while in the hotel’s room. Then they left hotel and headed to South Beach where Montana parked his car behind the fire hydrant. Officer observed the parking violation and approached Montana. When doing so, officer noticed marijuana odor from Montana’s vehicle. Officer demanded the search of the vehicle; Montana permitted.…show more content…
The charge of weapon concealment will be dismissed since weapon was located in an open side pocket within vehicle, it was not covered with any other object, so as to obscure officer's view of weapon, and defendant made no attempt to conceal the weapon. O.S., 120 So. 3d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). In O.S., defendant’s case was reverse because the weapon was not concealed under the factors set forth by the Florida Supreme Court in Dorelus v. State, 747 So.2d 368 (Fla.1999). In Dorelus, Florida Supreme Court concluded: “undisputed facts that a gun was located in a vehicle in an open console underneath the radio and that the officer making a traffic stop observed the shiny silver butt of a gun sticking out of the console were sufficient for trial court to conclude that gun was not concealed, and thus, dismissal of charge of carrying a concealed firearm was warranted, in absence of any evidence that defendant attempted to hide the presence of the firearm or that officer had any difficulty recognizing the object as a firearm.” West's F.S.A. RCrP Rule 3.190(c)(4); F.S.1995, §§ 790.001(2),
Show More
Related

  • Heat Therapy Literature Review

    3118 Words  | 13 Pages

    exercise vigilantly to induce lower back DOMS experimentally. Participants were allotted to 1 of 2 sub studies (prevention and treatment). After 24 hours following exercise in treatment group, relief of pain with the heat wrap was 138% more than with the cold pack; there were no significant variations among the groups in changes in self-reported physical function and disability. In this small scale study, continuous low-level heat wrap therapy was significantly beneficial to prevent and treat in early

    Read More

More about Case Study: Montana V. Montana

Open Document