Epstein Secrets

mplaint in Razorback Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09- 062943(19); see De

hat occur subsequent to the arrest cannot remove the probable cause that existed at the time of the arrest.") (citations omitted) (emphasis added); McCoy v. State, 565 So. 2d 860, 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (holding that hindsight should not be used to determine whether a prior arrest or search was made with proba

d others, Razorback Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scott W. Rothstein, et al., Case No. 09-062943(19) (herei

hat occur subsequent to the arrest cannot remove the probable cause that existed at the time of the arrest.") (citations omitted) (emphasis added); McCoy v. State, 565 So. 2d 860, 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (holding that hindsight should not be used to determine whether a prior arrest or search was made with prob

n 2 EFTA00583953 Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et at, Case No. 09-062943(19); see Dep

hat occur subsequent to the arrest cannot remove the probable cause that existed at the time of the arrest.") (citations omitted) (emphasis added); McCoy v. State, 565 So. 2d 860, 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (holding that hindsight should not be used to determine whether a prior arrest or search was made with proba