County Case No.: MM00-00487A-WH
Appeal No.: DD-0013
JAMES GRIFFIN,
Appellant,
vs.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
___________________________________/
OPINION OF THE COURT
This is an appeal from the county court of Polk County, Judge Ellen Masters presiding. Appellant, James Griffin, argues that the trial court erred by failing to grant his motion to suppress certain evidence. This court has jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030. The ruling of the county court is affirmed.
I.
On August 16, 2000, at approximately 9:57 a.m., Officer Bacon, of the Winter Haven Police Department, testified that he was stopped at a red light while east bound on Avenue D and the intersection of 6th Street in Winter Haven. The officer=s vehicle was directly behind a Buick which was also stopped at the light. The Buick was behind another car. The Buick, which had two occupants, was in the lane for turning left or proceeding straight, not in the right turn lane. Officer Bacon testified that the Buick did not have its turn signals activated. A McDonalds Restaurant was on the right and a Budget Inn Motel was on the left. Officer Bacon testified that the Buick made a left turn into the parking lot of the motel. Officer Bacon lost sight of the Buick for less than ten seconds as it passed through the motel parking lot. The Buick turned south on 6th Street. Officer Bacon believed the driver drove through the motel parking lot to avoid the light. Officer Bacon testified that he drove through the intersection, turned around and initiated a traffic stop of the Buick. The driver, who had no license in his possession, gave the name AJames Otis Griffin@ and November 27, 1975 as his date of birth. Investigation established that the driver=s name was AJames Michael Griffin@ and his date of birth was November 20, 1975. A driver=s license check revealed that his license was suspended. The appellant was ordered to appear on a charge of giving false information to an officer, in violation of section 901.36, Florida Statutes (1999). The appellant was cited for cutting through a parking lot to avoid a traffic control device.
The trial court denied Appellant=s motion to suppress. Appellant plead no contest and reserved his right to appeal the trial court=s dispositive ruling on his motion to suppress.
II.
Appellant argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress because, he alleges, that the officer did not have probable cause to believe that the appellant had committed a traffic infraction. In support of his argument, the appellant points out the fact that the trial judge, in denying the motion to suppress, noted that the appellant was probably not guilty of the infraction. A trial judge=s ruling on a motion to suppress is presumptively correct and will be affirmed if based upon competent substantial evidence. Porter v. State, 765 So.2d 76, 77 (Fla. 2000); Escobar v. State, 699 So. 2d 984, 987 (Fla. 1999). To succeed on appeal, Appellant must show that the ruling of the trial court is not supported by competent evidence. Id.
III.
The decision to stop an automobile is reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 809-810, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996). In this case, Officer Bacon testified that when the appellant=s vehicle pulled into the parking lot, he was able to see the vehicle at all times except for a brief period that lasted ten seconds. He observed the vehicle pull into the parking lot, cut across through the parking lot, and go back on the roadway. Officer Bacon conducted a traffic stop on the vehicle for driving through the lot to avoid a traffic light, in violation of 316.074, Florida Statutes (2000). The appellant testified that he pulled into the parking lot seeking directions, not seeking to avoid the traffic light. He testified that he stopped at the red light in the left turn lane of 6th Street, seeking to make a left turn into the motel parking lot in order to ask a woman for directions. He waited for traffic to pass, then made the left turn after the light turned green. Appellant testified that he stopped to ask the woman for directions and that that conversation lasted about a minute. Weight and credibility are solely within the province of the fact finder; the appellate court=s only function is to determine sufficiency as a matter of law. State v. Santomaso, 764 So.2d 735 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Stewart v. State, 672 So.2d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Chaudoin v State, 362 So.2d 398 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Conflicts in evidence and questions about witness= credibility will not justify reversal when evidence is legally sufficient to support conviction. Wetherington v. State, 263 So.2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). The reviewing court should not substitute its opinion of the facts for that of the trier of fact. Tibbs v. State, 397 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 1981); State v. McIntyre, 393 So.2d 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). Having resolved disputed facts in the state=s favor, the trial judge concluded that the officer had a reasonable basis in fact to make a traffic stop. This court finds that the record contains competent substantial evidence supporting the trial judge=s findings.
Accordingly, the order of the county court is AFFIRMED.
ORDERED this day of October 2001.
Charles B. Curry, Chief Judge
Joseph M. McCarthy, A.S.A.