Quintavis Jaquan Wilson v. State of Florida
Docket 6D2025-1402
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Court
- District Court of Appeal of Florida
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 6D2025-1402
Appeal from the circuit court of Osceola County in a criminal case (revocation and search-related issues).
Summary
The Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the appellant's conviction. The appeal challenged trial rulings related to a search and the revocation hearing, but the court relied on prior decisions holding that smell plus additional observations can support searches and that failure to object preserves nothing for appeal. Because the case involved more than the smell of cannabis and the defendant failed to contemporaneously object at the revocation hearing, the panel concluded no reversible error occurred and affirmed the lower court's decision.
Issues Decided
- Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence or permitting a search based on the smell of cannabis plus other observations.
- Whether the appellant preserved his challenge to the revocation hearing by making a contemporaneous objection.
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on controlling precedents that permit searches when the smell of cannabis is accompanied by additional observable facts, and found this case involved such additional observations. The court also applied the rule that a party must make a timely, contemporaneous objection to preserve an issue for appeal, and determined the appellant did not do so at the revocation hearing. Those two points led the panel to find no reversible error.
Authorities Cited
- State v. Simpson414 So. 3d 291 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025)
- State v. Fortin383 So. 3d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)
- Lincoln v. State398 So. 3d 1156 (Fla. 6th DCA 2024)
- Morrow v. State397 So. 3d 1205 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)
Parties
- Appellant
- Quintavis Jaquan Wilson
- Appellee
- State of Florida
- Judge
- John D.W. Beamer
- Attorney
- Blair Allen, Public Defender
- Attorney
- Pamela H. Izakowitz, Assistant Public Defender
- Attorney
- James Uthmeier, Attorney General
- Attorney
- Allison Leigh Morris, Assistant Attorney General
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-04-24
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult appellate counsel about rehearing or further review
If interested in pursuing further relief, the defendant should speak with counsel immediately about filing a motion for rehearing or seeking discretionary review by the Florida Supreme Court according to applicable deadlines.
- 2
Confirm post-appeal deadlines
Determine the deadlines for filing a motion for rehearing in the district court and a petition for review in the Florida Supreme Court, and prepare any necessary filings promptly.
- 3
Consider preservation strategies for future proceedings
For similar issues in future hearings, ensure contemporaneous objections are made on the record to preserve arguments for appeal.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appeals court affirmed the lower court's ruling and found no reversible error in the search or revocation proceedings.
- Why did the court say the search was okay?
- Because officers had the smell of cannabis plus other observable facts supporting their actions, the court found the search justified under controlling precedents.
- What about the challenge to the revocation hearing?
- The court ruled the appellant failed to make a timely objection at the hearing, so that issue was not preserved for appeal.
- Can this decision be appealed further?
- Potentially, the defendant could seek review by the Florida Supreme Court, but further review is discretionary and subject to filing rules and deadlines.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 6D2025-1402
Lower Tribunal No. 2022-CF-000885
_____________________________
QUINTAVIS JAQUAN WILSON,
Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
_____________________________
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Osceola County.
John D.W. Beamer, Judge.
April 24, 2026
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See State v. Simpson, 414 So. 3d 291, 297 (Fla. 6th DCA
2025) (“We have no occasion to address [whether the smell of cannabis alone is
sufficient to establish probable cause] because this case does not involve smell
alone.”); State v. Fortin, 383 So. 3d 820, 823-24 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024) (“In the
instant case, we do not need to decide whether the smell of fresh marijuana alone
gives an officer probable cause to search a vehicle, because in addition to the plain
smell of fresh marijuana, the officer saw in plain view, . . . uncontained flakes of
marijuana.”); Lincoln v. State, 398 So. 3d 1156, 1160 (Fla. 6th DCA 2024)
(“Generally, to raise a claimed error on appeal, a litigant must object . . . when the
alleged error occurs.”); Morrow v. State, 397 So. 3d 1205, 1208 (Fla. 1st DCA
2024) (“Morrow did not preserve this argument by contemporaneous objection at
the revocation hearing . . . .”).
NARDELLA, SMITH and MIZE, JJ., concur.
Blair Allen, Public Defender, and Pamela H. Izakowitz, Assistant Public Defender,
Bartow, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison Leigh Morris,
Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
2