Before I founded The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm, I taught criminal arrest procedure to recruits as a police academy instructor, and jurisdiction was one of the first limits every class learned. I am Rocky Brancato, and across more than 25 years of Hillsborough County practice and over 150 jury trials, I have seen cases turn on one plain question: where was the officer standing when the arrest happened? Our attorneys ask that question about every arrest made by an off-duty or out-of-town officer, and when the answer falls on the wrong side of a city or county line, we move to suppress what the officer found.

Does an off-duty officer still have arrest powers in Florida?

Yes. Inside the officer’s own jurisdiction, being off duty does not shrink a Florida officer’s arrest authority. In Sinquefield v. State, 1 So. 3d 370 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), a City of Palmetto officer tried to stop a man in another part of Manatee County. The Second District Court of Appeal, which hears appeals from Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco counties, said the officer’s off-duty status did not change his arrest authority. The problem was location: he was sworn only inside Palmetto, so outside the city he acted as a private citizen.

Officers who work paid private details are also still police. In State v. Williams, 297 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974), a uniformed Tampa police sergeant hired by a dance hall to work during his off-duty hours seized a handgun from a patron’s handbag and arrested her. The court agreed with the trial judge that the sergeant “acted as an officer of the City of Tampa,” so the constitutional rules for police searches applied to him. The court still reversed the suppression order, because it found the patron had consented to the search.

That rule matters in Tampa because extra-duty work is an organized program here. The Tampa Police Department’s Extra Duty Office contracts with private citizens, businesses, and organizations for uniformed officers at special events, construction-site traffic control, and escorts, and it requires a background check for establishments with an alcohol license. As we have noted in our Ybor City disorderly conduct cases, Tampa Police also maintain a heavy presence along Seventh Avenue at closing time. A uniformed officer working a bar door inside Tampa city limits has full police power, and the same Fourth Amendment limits that govern a stop and frisk in Florida apply to that officer. Our attorneys test an extra-duty officer’s stop, search, and arrest exactly as we would an on-duty officer’s.

Where does a Tampa Bay officer’s arrest authority stop?

A Florida officer’s full arrest power stops at the edge of the agency’s territory. For a city police officer, that edge is the city limit. For a sheriff’s deputy, it is the county line. The Florida Supreme Court explained in State v. Repple, 428 So. 3d 59 (Fla. 2025) that, under Article VIII, section 2(c) of the Florida Constitution, a city’s police power outside its borders exists only where the Legislature has authorized it. Sheriffs work differently. Under section 30.15(5)(a), Florida Statutes, a sheriff’s jurisdiction runs throughout the entire county, including incorporated cities, concurrently with city police.

The patchwork is large. In 2025, Florida police departments employed 20,647 full-time officers, sheriffs’ offices employed 23,776 full-time law enforcement officers, and school and port agencies employed another 1,987, according to FDLE’s Criminal Justice Agency Profile report. Every one of those officers carries a badge with a boundary. A Tampa officer driving home through Brandon, which is unincorporated Hillsborough County, has left Tampa’s jurisdiction. A Hillsborough deputy standing in the same spot has not. A Pasco deputy who stops a driver on Dale Mabry Highway in Tampa is outside Pasco County, and the question becomes which exception, if any, gave that deputy authority. When a Hillsborough County case involves an out-of-town officer, our Hillsborough County criminal defense team starts by mapping exactly where each step of the stop, detention, and arrest took place.

What can an officer legally do outside their jurisdiction?

An officer outside their jurisdiction can arrest only through fresh pursuit, a mutual aid agreement, or a citizen’s arrest. A fourth, narrower rule covers DUI breath tests after an in-city arrest. If no rule applies, the officer acted without authority, and the defense can ask the court to suppress what followed.

Fresh pursuit. The pursuit has to start inside the officer’s territory. When a fresh pursuit arrest happens outside the officer’s county, the officer must immediately notify the officer in charge of that jurisdiction, and both must bring the arrested person before a trial court judge of the county where the arrest was made without unnecessary delay.

Mutual aid agreements. Florida’s Mutual Aid Act allows written voluntary cooperation agreements for routine work across jurisdictional lines and written requested operational assistance agreements for emergencies. Each agreement must spell out the assistance, the agency in command, and a time limit, and a copy must be filed with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement within 14 days after it is signed. The writing requirement can be waived for up to 90 days only after a Governor-declared state of emergency. Because the agreement is a document, our attorneys demand it in discovery and read its terms against what the officer actually did.

The DUI breath test rule. Repple involved a Maitland officer who arrested a driver for DUI inside Maitland and then requested a breath test at a sheriff-run facility outside the city. The Florida Supreme Court held that Florida’s implied consent law authorized that request, quashed the Sixth District decision that had upheld suppression, and approved the result in State v. Torres, 350 So. 3d 421 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022), a Winter Park case with the same pattern. The Court expressly declined to adopt a broader “continuing investigation” exception. That matters locally: as we have explained in our post on refusing a breathalyzer in Florida, breath testing in the 13th Judicial Circuit runs through the sheriff’s central breath testing facility. Under Repple, a city officer’s request there is authorized when the DUI arrest itself happened inside the officer’s city. An arrest made outside the city needs its own lawful basis first.

What counts as a lawful citizen’s arrest in Florida?

A private person in Florida may arrest someone who commits a felony or a breach of the peace in that person’s presence, and an officer outside their jurisdiction has that same power and no more. In Phoenix v. State, 455 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1984), the Martin County Sheriff and a deputy stopped a truck in St. Lucie County after an air and ground surveillance operation and arrested the occupants. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the arrests as citizen’s arrests, reasoning that officers outside their jurisdiction should not be any less capable of making a felony arrest than a private citizen, nor have any greater power.

Drunk driving is the classic out-of-jurisdiction breach of the peace, which is why so many of these cases are DUI cases. In Edwards v. State, 462 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), an off-duty Okeechobee officer, not in uniform and showing no badge, followed a pickup truck outside the city limits for about five miles. The driver crossed the center line three to seven times, forced oncoming cars onto the shoulder, and nearly hit a bridge abutment. The court held that this driving was a breach of the peace and upheld the citizen’s arrest. If you were stopped for DUI by an officer from another city or county, our Tampa DUI lawyer page explains how our attorneys build that challenge.

Two more limits narrow the doctrine. First, for a misdemeanor, there must be an actual arrest, meaning the person is deprived of the freedom to leave. In Steiner v. State, 690 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), the State tried to support a DUI arrest with a security guard’s account of a driver whose car later caught fire. The guard never detained the driver, so there was no citizen’s arrest, and the officer could not rely on the guard’s account for a misdemeanor the officer did not see. The Fourth District restored the county court’s order suppressing the evidence. Second, “breach of the peace” is read narrowly. The definition comes from section 877.03, Florida Statutes, the same statute that defines disorderly conduct, and conduct that creates no more than annoyance does not qualify.

Legal scholars have criticized how vague the doctrine is. In Vilifying the Vigilante: A Narrowed Scope of Citizen’s Arrest, 25 Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 557 (2016), Professor Ira P. Robbins argues that citizen’s arrest rules are unclear on the level of suspicion required, how long a person may be held, and how much force is allowed. He recommends limiting the power to a few groups, including out-of-jurisdiction police. Our attorneys use those narrow edges to test every off-duty arrest.

What happened in Jeffries v. State?

In Jeffries v. State, No. 5D2024-1721 (Fla. 5th DCA July 31, 2026), the Fifth District threw out evidence from an off-duty officer’s citizen’s arrest because the man he arrested had not committed a felony or a breach of the peace in his presence. The officer worked for the Clay County School District police but lived in Putnam County, outside his jurisdiction. His daughter told him someone had been trying to break into his patrol car. He went outside, saw Christien Jeffries already leaving his property, identified himself as law enforcement, and ordered him to stop. Jeffries kept walking and went through an open gate into a neighbor’s backyard, and the officer did not follow him in.

The officer then drove his personal truck to a nearby apartment complex, found Jeffries, again identified himself as law enforcement, and ordered him to stop. He testified that he did not identify himself as a private citizen because most people would not stop for one. Jeffries stopped, turned, and tossed an object that turned out to be a pill bottle. The officer restrained him, and responding officers found a stun gun on him. Jeffries was later convicted of possession of an electric weapon or device by a convicted felon.

The State conceded that the officer never saw a felony, so the case came down to breach of the peace. The court rejected each piece of the State’s argument. The officer never saw anyone touch his patrol car, his daughter’s report was not his own observation, and the smudges he photographed were found only after the arrest. Leaving a yard when confronted, walking through a neighbor’s open gate, and appearing intoxicated without endangering anyone were not breaches of the peace. Approaching an elderly woman at the complex in the middle of the day, without threatening her or even raising his voice, was not one either. The court distinguished drunk-driving cases like Edwards because they involved conduct that “clearly and significantly endangers the public.” It reversed the denial of the motion to suppress and vacated the conviction for possession of an electric weapon by a convicted felon.

The court also held that the tossed pill bottle could not justify the search that turned up the stun gun, because Jeffries had already stopped in compliance with the order when he threw it. We cover that abandonment issue in our post on whether police can use drugs you threw down in Florida.

Jeffries is a Fifth District decision, but it reaches Tampa Bay courtrooms. Under Pardo v. State, 596 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 1992), a district court decision binds every Florida trial court when no other district has ruled differently, so Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco judges must follow it unless the Second District decides otherwise. Our post on disorderly conduct in Florida covers how the same narrow breach-of-the-peace definition plays out in Ybor City arrests.

What is the “color of office” rule?

The color of office rule bars an officer outside their jurisdiction from using police authority to see unlawful activity or gain evidence that a private citizen could not get. Phoenix set the line. Using a police car and announcing “police” at the moment of arrest does not, by itself, ruin a citizen’s arrest, as long as the evidence for the arrest was gathered before the officer asserted any official authority.

The rule bites when an officer uses the badge to get something. In State v. Sills, 852 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), Coconut Creek officers arrested a man for traffic offenses inside their city, then drove him in handcuffs to his apartment in a neighboring city. There they had him sign a Coconut Creek police waiver of a search warrant and talked about him becoming an informant. The Fourth District affirmed suppression of the pills they found, because the officers obtained his consent through the power of their office, including the prospect of leniency that no private citizen could offer.

In Jeffries, the officer repeatedly announced himself as law enforcement, but the court decided the case on breach of the peace and did not reach a color of office theory. Our attorneys raise both arguments when the facts support them, because they attack different parts of the State’s case.

Is evidence thrown out if an off-duty arrest was unlawful?

Often, yes. When an out-of-jurisdiction arrest has no lawful basis, the usual remedy is a motion to suppress, which asks the judge to exclude the evidence the arrest produced. Our post on the motion to suppress evidence in Tampa explains that process. Suppression is not automatic, though, as the table shows.

One warning sign for the future: in Repple, Justice Grosshans wrote separately that suppression should not be the remedy when an officer oversteps territorial limits, because those limits protect neighboring governments rather than the accused. No other justice joined that view, and the majority did not adopt it. Prosecutors will cite it anyway, which is one more reason our attorneys pair the jurisdiction argument with Fourth Amendment and citizen’s arrest arguments.

Is it resisting arrest to walk away from an off-duty officer outside their jurisdiction?

Not under the resisting without violence statute, if the officer had no authority there. Section 843.02, Florida Statutes requires proof that the officer was engaged in the lawful execution of a legal duty. In Sinquefield, the Second District held that a Palmetto officer acting outside his city was only a private citizen, refused to read the statute as creating a crime of resisting a citizen’s arrest, and reversed the conviction. Our post on resisting an officer without violence in Florida covers the other elements of that charge.

That defense belongs in a courtroom. At the scene, you cannot tell whether an officer is in fresh pursuit, working under a mutual aid agreement, or standing one block inside the city line, and using force can bring new charges that do not depend on jurisdiction. Comply, stay quiet, and let our attorneys contest the officer’s authority later with the records in hand.

What should you do after an arrest by an off-duty or out-of-town officer?

Act within days, because the strongest evidence of where and how the arrest happened disappears fastest.

1. Write down the details while they are fresh. Note the exact location, whether the officer was in uniform or plain clothes, what agency the officer named, what vehicle the officer drove, and the exact words used to make you stop.
2. Identify every camera. Bars, apartment complexes, gas stations, and doorbell cameras can record over old footage within days. Our attorneys send preservation requests right away.
3. Request the DUI license hearing on time. After a DUI arrest, section 322.2615, Florida Statutes gives you 10 days from the notice of suspension to request a formal or informal review hearing.
4. Use the window before charges are filed. The State Attorney’s Office decides what to file after the arrest. Our representation before charges are filed can put the jurisdiction problem in front of the prosecutor before a charging decision is made.
5. File the motion to suppress before trial. Florida’s rules generally require a motion to suppress to be filed before trial, and the hearing depends on dispatch records, body-worn camera video, the agency’s jurisdiction, and any mutual aid agreement on file with FDLE.

Frequently asked questions

Can an off-duty officer working security at a Tampa bar arrest me?

Yes, if the bar is inside the officer’s jurisdiction, because an off-duty officer working a private detail still acts as a police officer, as the court held about a Tampa sergeant in State v. Williams. The Brancato Law Firm reviews extra-duty arrests the same way it reviews on-duty arrests, starting with whether the officer had a lawful reason to stop you. The same review applies when a detail officer outside a bar makes a DUI stop.

Can a Hillsborough County deputy arrest me inside Tampa city limits?

Yes. Under section 30.15(5)(a), Florida Statutes, a sheriff’s jurisdiction runs throughout the entire county, including cities like Tampa, alongside city police. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm focus those cases on whether the deputy had a lawful basis for the stop, since jurisdiction will not be in dispute.

Can a Pinellas or Pasco officer arrest me for DUI in Hillsborough County?

Only through fresh pursuit that began in the officer’s own county, a written mutual aid agreement that covers the activity, or a valid citizen’s arrest for a felony or breach of the peace the officer personally saw. The Brancato Law Firm demands the pursuit records and any mutual aid agreement in these cases and holds the State to proving one of those grounds. If an out-of-county officer arrested you, our DUI defense team can review whether any of them applies.

What counts as a breach of the peace for a citizen’s arrest in Florida?

Conduct that clearly disturbs or endangers others, such as fighting or dangerous drunk driving, can qualify, while conduct that is merely annoying does not. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm compare the officer’s own report against the narrow definition courts apply under Jeffries and section 877.03, Florida Statutes.

Can charges be dropped if the arresting officer was outside their jurisdiction?

Yes, charges can be dropped or reduced when the arrest was unlawful and the key evidence is suppressed, although the outcome depends on whether the State can prove fresh pursuit, a mutual aid agreement, or a valid citizen’s arrest. The Brancato Law Firm raises the jurisdiction problem early, often before the prosecutor makes a filing decision, through our pre-file advocacy.

Talk to a Tampa defense lawyer about an off-duty arrest

Ten days is all you have to challenge a DUI license suspension, and the video that shows where an off-duty or out-of-town officer stopped you can be recorded over even sooner. The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato, will start by pinning down the officer’s agency, jurisdiction, and legal basis for the arrest, then preserve the footage and records that prove it. Call (813) 727-7159 today to discuss your case. For more about our defense strategies, visit our Tampa DUI defense page.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

I’m Rocky Brancato, founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm. I served as Chief Operating Officer of the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office, overseeing a staff of over 100, taught at the police academy, and am on call for the Tampa PBA and Suncoast PBA. Today our attorneys handle license plate reader cases from both sides of the badge: people whose movements were tracked, and officers accused of tracking them.

Our earlier guide, What Are Flock Cameras and ALPRs in Tampa?, explains how the cameras work. This article covers what happens when the people with access abuse it.

What Happened in the Pinellas County Deputy Arrests?

Two former Pinellas County deputies were arrested on September 30, 2026, in separate cases involving personal use of law enforcement databases, Sheriff Bob Gualtieri announced. Both men had resigned before their arrests, and both are presumed innocent. The facts below come from the sheriff’s public account, as reported by IONTB.

The 17-year-old and the “ALPR hit” that never happened

Former Deputy Travis Stanton, 33, was a community deputy in Seminole. According to the sheriff, a 17-year-old restaurant worker told him her age and her car on July 28, 2026. Minutes later, Stanton allegedly ran her plate through the Florida Crime Information Center (FCIC) and then used other databases to identify her mother’s household and pull driver’s license photos of the girl and her twin sister. On August 19, he allegedly ran more searches from the Seminole High School parking lot, entering the reason code “verifying an identity.”

Stanton later told the girl he had received an ALPR alert showing her license was suspended for truancy. Gualtieri said no such alert existed, and that Stanton’s case did not involve misuse of the ALPR database itself. Stanton is charged with unlawful access to a computer network under section 815.06 and official misconduct under section 838.022.

381 searches of one woman across five databases

Former Deputy Karl Gwynne, 57, joined the agency in 2005. According to the sheriff, he ran 381 searches on a 35-year-old woman across five databases between January 2025 and July 2026, including 300 ALPR searches. He made 207 of them off duty. Gwynne had arrested the woman in 2010, and she had rejected his advances. He faces four counts of unlawfully accessing a computer system and one count of official misconduct. In our experience, cases like these are decided by the audit trail, and both will likely turn on what the logs show.

What Florida Crimes Apply When an Officer Misuses a License Plate Reader?

Two felony statutes carry most Florida prosecutions, and a third law decides the officer’s pension. Our attorneys analyze all three at the outset of any officer database case.

Why “exceeds authorization” is the heart of the case

Florida courts have debated this question for 30 years. In Gallagher v. State, 618 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), a Sunrise Police Department aide ran her boyfriend through NCIC and FCIC out of curiosity. The Fourth District affirmed her conviction without an opinion, while Chief Judge Glickstein dissented, arguing that the statute punished unauthorized access, not improper use. The current statute closes that gap. The 2018 version reached only access “without authorization,” and the version in force after the 2019 amendment also reaches access where “the manner of use exceeds authorization.”

Even so, section 815.06(7)(b) exempts a person acting “within the scope of his or her lawful employment.” Purpose is therefore the battleground. Prosecutors prove it with case numbers, reason codes, and timing, such as Gwynne’s 207 off-duty searches. Our Tampa internet crimes attorney page explains how we defend computer crimes charges.

Why official misconduct is harder to prove

Official misconduct requires two things beyond a bad search. The state must prove the officer falsified, concealed, or altered an official record, and the statute limits “official record” to public records. The state must also prove the officer acted to obtain a “benefit,” which section 838.014 defines as any gain or advantage, including anything the person regards as one.

The benefit element is where these cases are won and lost. In Jones v. State, No. 6D2023-0311 (Fla. 6th DCA June 23, 2023), a Polk County detective falsified investigative reports for two years. The Sixth District ordered acquittal on all 18 official misconduct counts because the state never proved he falsified the reports to obtain a benefit. Trial courts in Pinellas and Hillsborough follow Jones unless the Second District rules otherwise.

The pension consequence few people discuss

A conviction for a chapter 838 felony forfeits a public employee’s retirement benefits under section 112.3173, and a no contest plea counts as a conviction. The exact count matters. In Houston v. City of Tampa Firefighters & Police Officers’ Pension Fund Board of Trustees, 303 So. 3d 233 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020), a Tampa police sergeant accused of using the DAVID driver’s license database in a tax refund scheme pleaded guilty only to receiving stolen federal property. The Second District reversed the forfeiture of her pension and ordered it restored with interest, because her plea did not establish a specified offense. For an officer, what the plea says matters as much as whether there is one.

How Common Is Flock and ALPR Misuse by Police?

Documented cases now number in the dozens. In August 2026, The Washington Post reported that at least 46 officers nationwide had been accused of using license plate cameras for unauthorized tracking, according to Al Jazeera. Our firm tracks these prosecutions because the sentences are rising.

In 2023, the Kansas lieutenant received probation. By September 30, 2026, the Texas officer was headed to prison for five years.

Who Catches Officers Who Misuse License Plate Readers?

Outsiders catch most of them. Where the public record shows how a case began, the first alarm usually came from a victim, a victim’s friend, or a reporter reading public search logs. Agencies then acted quickly. Our attorneys look first at how a case surfaced, because it shapes both the proof and the defense.

Sources: Creative Loafing Tampa, Dexerto, The Washington Post, CNN, and Tech Times.

The Washington Post put it bluntly in an August 2026 headline: “Police departments weren’t looking for officers abusing Flock. We did it for them.” Its review of search logs led to discipline in two departments.

Where the thin blue line holds, and where it breaks

Detection is the weak point. Once misuse is exposed, agencies have acted fast. Pinellas arrested its own deputies, Lufkin called in the Texas Rangers, and Haines City arrested its officer within a day of learning of the searches. In the cases reviewed here, no agency shielded an officer once the facts were public. Four gaps explain why detection lags:

1. No audit requirement. Florida’s ALPR statutes, section 316.0777 and section 316.0778, govern placement, retention, and public records. Neither requires an agency to review who searched what.
2. Empty reason codes. “Investigation” was the most common reason Wisconsin agencies entered for Flock searches in early 2025, the Wisconsin Examiner found.
3. Shared logins. Pinellas runs searches through a shared “service account” across three vendors, so its public log cannot show which deputy searched, TCPalm reported.
4. Shrinking outside visibility. Flock now redacts officer names and plates from public audit logs, which narrows the channel that has caught the most officers.

Who decides the charges

The arresting agency does not make the final charging decision in Florida. The State Attorney for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, which covers Pinellas and Pasco, will decide whether and how to charge Stanton and Gwynne. In Hillsborough, that decision belongs to the Thirteenth Circuit State Attorney. For an accused officer, the investigation’s path shapes the defense. A shared service account forces the state to prove who ran each search, while an officer’s own admission to a supervisor, as in the Gwynne and Haines City cases, leaves far less room.

What Did Governor DeSantis Order on License Plate Readers?

Governor Ron DeSantis directed the Florida Department of Transportation to revoke permits for ALPRs on state highway rights-of-way, effective September 30, 2026. The FDOT memorandum cited reports of misuse and data privacy concerns. DeSantis said, “I don’t want to have this become a surveillance state,” Axios reported.

Section 316.0777 supplies the authority: ALPRs sit on state highway rights-of-way only at FDOT’s discretion, and must come down within 30 days of notice. The order does not reach city streets, county roads, or private property. Our attorneys tell Tampa Bay drivers the same thing: the cameras moved off state roads, and local networks remain.

Sources: Axios Tampa Bay and ABC Action News.

Where Do Florida Candidates Stand on Flock Cameras?

Neither major-party nominee for governor has promised a full ban, but both support the DeSantis order. Democrat David Jolly wants a judicial warrant before police use the data, and Republican Byron Donalds wants harsher penalties for officers who abuse it, the Tampa Bay Times reported. Donalds called for a pause on Flock contracts in July. Jolly also wants a special legislative session and a ban on use for immigration enforcement.

Locally, former Governor Charlie Crist proposes a moratorium on expanding St. Petersburg’s Flock system, while Mayor Ken Welch defends it, ahead of their November 3 runoff, per Bay News 9. Nationally, more than 150 local governments have deactivated or canceled ALPR contracts, according to the advocacy group DeFlock, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott blocked state agencies from spending on Flock’s networks, Claims Journal reported. Any rewrite the Legislature passes next session will change what ALPR evidence looks like in Tampa Bay courtrooms, and our firm will update this guide when it does.

What Is Law Enforcement’s Case for Keeping License Plate Readers?

Sheriffs and chiefs argue the cameras solve violent crimes and find missing people, and that the answer to misuse is punishment. “Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater,” Gualtieri said on September 30, crediting the cameras with solving homicides and rapes. According to the Tampa Police Department, its ALPR system has assisted in 622 arrests, 485 vehicle recoveries, 68 firearm recoveries, and 14 missing-person cases since 2021, per Florida Politics.

The strongest evidence involves abducted children. In 2024, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children partnered with Flock to push AMBER Alert vehicles into the camera network. In August 2026, Lake City police used Flock to find a woman’s SUV that her boyfriend allegedly drove off with while her two children were inside, WFLA reported.

Controlled research is more modest on deterrence. In a randomized experiment across 30 crime hot spots in Northern Virginia, George Mason University researchers found no statistically significant drop in crime from license plate reader patrols during a 30-day follow-up (Lum et al., Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2011), as summarized by the Justice Department’s CrimeSolutions program. That study tested patrols, not investigations. Both claims can hold: the cameras may prevent little crime, yet still find a specific car carrying a specific child. Our attorneys see the same tension in court, where an ALPR hit can be strong evidence of location and weak evidence of anything else.

Does the Fourth Amendment Limit Police Searches of Flock Data?

The law is unsettled, and 2026 moved it toward privacy. In Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018), the FBI obtained months of a robbery suspect’s cell-site location records without a warrant, and the Supreme Court held that acquiring them was a search. In Chatrie v. United States, 146 S. Ct. 2193 (2026), police used a geofence warrant to obtain Google location data near a Virginia bank robbery. By a 6-3 vote, the Court held that obtaining location history this way is a search, even for a short period. Justice Kagan wrote for five justices, and Justice Gorsuch concurred in the judgment, as the Congressional Research Service explains. Chatrie never mentions license plate readers, but it repeats Carpenter’s point that society has not expected police to “secretly monitor and catalogue every single movement of an individual’s car.”

The Tampa license plate reader ruling

In United States v. Floyd, No. 8:23-cr-00305 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 21, 2025), detectives tied a robbery suspect’s Mazda to a string of Tampa Bay store robberies through Vigilant hits and the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office “Eye on Crime” ALPR system. U.S. District Judge Tom Barber denied suppression, holding that the readers captured discrete snapshots on public roads and that querying the databases was not a search. Floyd predates Chatrie, so our attorneys treat the question as open again for any client whose case rests on a long trail of ALPR hits.

Elsewhere, Schmidt v. City of Norfolk, No. 2:24-cv-621 (E.D. Va. Jan. 27, 2026), upheld Norfolk, Virginia’s network of about 176 Flock cameras. The appeal, No. 26-1227, is tentatively set for Fourth Circuit argument in December 2026. Losing a motion to suppress does not end the issue. At trial, the defense can still challenge whether the camera read the plate correctly and whether the alert was current.

What Should You Do If You Think an Officer Tracked You?

Act within days, write everything down, and demand that the agency preserve its audit logs. Our attorneys take these steps for clients who believe they were tracked:

1. Document the red flags. Write down dates, places, and anything an officer knew about you without a reason to know it. In the Stanton case, the claimed “ALPR hit” was the tell.
2. Request your own ALPR data. Section 316.0777(4)(b) allows an agency to release plate data to the person the plate is registered to, unless it is active criminal intelligence or investigative information.
3. File an internal affairs complaint in writing. Ask the agency to preserve the audit log for your plate, name, and driver’s license number.
4. Ask about protective options. A stalking injunction or a referral to an outside agency, such as FDLE, may fit when the officer’s own department is slow to act.

If you are an officer under investigation

Say nothing about your searches until you have counsel. Under Fla. Stat. 112.532(1)(i), an officer has the right to counsel during an interrogation about fitness for duty. In Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967), the Supreme Court held that statements compelled under threat of job loss cannot be used in a criminal prosecution. Voluntary statements, texts, and audit logs remain fair game. See our law enforcement officer representation articles.

Why Does Timing Matter in a License Plate Reader Case?

Images disappear fast. In August 2026, Flock cut its recommended default retention from 30 days to 7, and Florida caps retention under the schedule set by section 316.0778. A preservation letter sent in the first week can decide a case, whether our firm represents the person tracked or the officer accused. The same is true of messages and phone records, as we explain in our guide to social media evidence in Tampa criminal cases.

Frequently Asked Questions About Flock Camera Misuse

Is it a crime for a Florida officer to look up someone’s license plate for personal reasons?

Yes. Using a police database for a reason outside the job can violate section 815.06, which punishes access that exceeds authorization as a third-degree felony. A false reason code can add official misconduct under section 838.022. In our experience, the audit log is the most important evidence on either side.

Did the Pinellas deputy use Flock cameras to track the 17-year-old girl?

No, according to Sheriff Gualtieri. Stanton allegedly used FCIC, driver’s license, and agency records systems, then falsely told the girl he had received a license plate reader alert. The other deputy, Karl Gwynne, is accused of about 300 ALPR searches on a different woman.

Do police departments audit officers’ Flock searches?

Rarely on a routine basis, based on the public record. Florida law does not require ALPR audits, and in many documented cases a victim or reporter first exposed the misuse. Our attorneys request the full audit log in every case where license plate reader searches are at issue.

Can I find out whether police searched my license plate?

Possibly. Section 316.0777 permits an agency to disclose ALPR data about a plate registered to you, unless it is part of an active criminal investigation. Because retention is short, The Brancato Law Firm recommends a written request and a preservation demand as soon as you suspect misuse.

Are Flock cameras still operating in Tampa and Hillsborough County?

Yes. The Tampa Police Department and the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office removed cameras from state rights-of-way by September 30, 2026, but both still operate license plate readers on city and county roads. Pasco County is the local exception, having ended its Flock contract.

Can an officer lose a pension over a Flock misuse conviction?

Yes, if the conviction is for a “specified offense” such as official misconduct. Under section 112.3173, a conviction or no contest plea to a chapter 838 felony forfeits public retirement benefits except the officer’s contributions. Our attorneys weigh this in every plea discussion in an officer’s case.

What should I do if I am an officer accused of misusing Flock or FCIC?

Call a lawyer before you answer questions about your searches. Florida’s Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights gives you the right to counsel during an interrogation, and the criminal case often moves on a separate track from internal affairs. The Brancato Law Firm represents officers in both proceedings at (813) 727-7159.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Tampa Internet Crimes Attorney page.

If an officer tracked you, or you are an officer facing a database misuse investigation, call the attorneys of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato, at (813) 727-7159. ALPR images may be deleted in as little as 7 days, so contact us before the evidence is gone.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

For law enforcement officers, few moments are more devastating than being on the other side of the law. Whether you serve with the Tampa Police Department, Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office, Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office, Pasco County Sheriff’s Office, or any agency in the Tampa Bay area, an arrest or criminal investigation brings risks that reach far beyond the courtroom.

Moreover, for officers who have spent their careers putting people behind bars, the stakes are uniquely personal. You are not just fighting for your freedom—you are fighting for your career, your reputation, your safety, and your future. I am Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato. My firm, The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., can help put you back in duty, where you belong.

Law Enforcement Agencies We Serve

The Stakes Are Higher for Officers

For most defendants, the concern is avoiding fines, probation, or jail. For officers, however, the impact can be far harsher. Because of your “position of trust,” prosecutors may argue for tougher treatment than they would for a civilian.

Loss of Second Amendment Rights

A conviction—even a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction—can mean the permanent loss of your Second Amendment rights. As a result, you would be unable to carry the very weapon that has defined your career. For an officer, losing firearm rights effectively ends your law enforcement career.

Personal Safety Concerns

If you have put people behind bars over the course of your career, the loss of your badge and firearm creates personal safety risks. Consequently, you lose not only your ability to work but also your ability to protect yourself and your family from those who may harbor grudges.

FDLE Certification at Risk

FDLE reviews criminal cases and administrative findings. Even if your case does not result in a conviction, disciplinary findings from an internal investigation can threaten your law enforcement certification. Therefore, protecting your certification requires defending against both criminal charges and administrative consequences.

Charges We Defend Against

The Brancato Law Firm defends officers against a wide range of criminal charges. Each type carries its own risks, but for law enforcement officers, the professional consequences often outweigh even the criminal penalties.

If You Have Faced Rocky Brancato’s Cross-Examination Before

Many officers in Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties have already faced Rocky Brancato in court. His cross-examinations are known for dismantling investigations and exposing weaknesses in testimony.

If you have ever been on that side of the stand, you know how difficult that pressure can be. However, when Rocky Brancato is in your corner, the equation flips entirely. His loyalty becomes 100% to you. Those accusing you will face the same relentless defense you once experienced in the witness box.

Trusted in the Most Serious Situations

The Tampa Police Benevolent Association and the Suncoast Police Benevolent Association trust Attorney Brancato to serve as on-call attorney for officer-involved shootings. That trust comes from more than 25 years of high-level criminal defense in Tampa Bay’s courts.

These organizations chose Rocky to serve the law enforcement community because they know he provides the most strategic, loyal, and high-level criminal defense available in the Tampa Bay area. Rocky knows that sometimes the chief law enforcement officer will take adverse positions against you in the media, for their own political expediency. He is not afraid and he is ready to change the narrative.

Unique Perspective from the Public Defender’s Office

Before founding The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., Rocky Brancato served as Chief Operations Officer of the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office—the largest criminal defense operation in the county. In that role, he collaborated extensively with law enforcement agencies across Hillsborough County.

As a result, he gained a perspective that few defense attorneys possess. That experience now informs his defense of officers who find themselves under investigation.

I Know What You Were Trained to Do—Because I Taught It

As a former police academy instructor, I trained officers on criminal procedure and courtroom testimony. I know what you were taught about Fourth Amendment searches, Miranda requirements, use of force documentation, and how to present yourself on the stand. When prosecutors or internal affairs try to second-guess your split-second decisions, I can put your actions in the context of your actual training—not some unrealistic standard invented after the fact.

Protecting Law Enforcement Officers’ Rights

Officers and correctional officers face unique risks that civilians do not. Therefore, a defense strategy must protect your rights at every stage:

• Garrity protections during internal affairs questioning
• Independent review of evidence, from body-worn cameras to reports and witness statements
• Defense strategies tailored to certification risks and administrative hearings
• Strategic reputation management to limit media and public exposure
• Aggressive courtroom representation against prosecutors who seek to make an example of you

Personal Attention on Every Case

Every law enforcement officer case at The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is personally represented by Rocky Brancato. You will not be passed off to a junior lawyer or treated as just another file number. There is too much at stake.

Frequently Asked Questions

Take Action Before It’s Too Late

Investigations move quickly, and hesitation can cost opportunities to protect your record, your rights, and your reputation. If you are a law enforcement officer in Hillsborough, Pinellas, or Pasco County and are under investigation or facing charges, you need an attorney who understands what is at stake.

Your career, your reputation, and your freedom deserve a defense attorney trusted in the most serious cases—an attorney who will fight with the same precision in your defense that once challenged you in the courtroom.

Call (813) 727-7159 for a Confidential Consultation

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.

620 E Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602

On-Call Attorney for Tampa Police Benevolent Association & Suncoast PBA

Related: Tampa DUI Lawyer | Tampa Domestic Violence Lawyer | Tampa Sex Crimes Lawyer | Tampa Homicide Lawyer