State of Florida, Petitioner v. Christopher Markus, Respondent — Canady, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Canady dissented from the majority's conclusion that the hot-pursuit exception did not justify the warrantless entry into Markus's private premises. He reasoned that a legally authorized arrest initiated in a public place may continue into a private place when the suspect flees, regardless of whether the underlying offense is a felony or misdemeanor, and that the record showed a sufficient pursuit. The dissent would have quashed the First District's decision and approved the conflicting decision from the Third District.