RICHARD P. WILLE, AS SHERIFF OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE,
v.
SAMUEL L. KARRH, APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Sheriff of Palm Beach County appealed the denial of his petition to forfeit a boat seized with over 1,000 pounds of marijuana aboard. The trial court had denied forfeiture based on an illegal search and seizure finding in a companion criminal proceeding. The court reversed, holding that civil forfeiture proceedings are distinct from criminal proceedings and cannot be determined solely by the outcome of criminal cases.
The court held that civil forfeiture proceedings are distinct from criminal proceedings and the record and judgment in a criminal action is not admissible in a forfeiture proceeding. The appellant must be allowed to prove its case in the forfeiture proceeding independent of the criminal proceeding's outcome.
[1] A forfeiture proceeding is civil in nature and distinct from a criminal proceeding.
[2] The record and judgment in a criminal action are not admissible in a forfeiture proceeding.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The proceeding is civil in nature and the record and judgment in the criminal action is not admissible.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that forfeiture proceedings are separate from criminal proceedings and criminal judgments cannot be imported into civil forfeiture cases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA boat was stopped and seized with over 1,000 pounds of marijuana aboard. It was stipulated that the boat carried contraband at the time of the stop. …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Forfeiture Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order denying the Sheriff-appellant’s petition for forfeiture of a boat.
The boat was stopped, seized, and over a thousand pounds of marijuana aboard confiscated. It was stipulated that the boat carried contraband at the time of the stop.
The trial court summarily denied the petition by adopting the holding in a companion criminal proceeding that the contraband in question was seized as a result of an illegal search and seizure.
Section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1981), provides:
The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal property has been seized because of its use or attempted use in violation of any provisions of law dealing with contraband, or such attorney as may be employed by the seizing agency, shall promptly proceed against the contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal property by rule to show cause in the circuit court within the jurisdiction in which the seizure or the offense occurred and may have such contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal property forfeited to the use of, or to be sold by, the. law enforcement agency making the seizure, upon producing due proof that the contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal property was being used in violation of the provisions of such law. The final order of forfeiture by the court shall perfect the state’s right and interest in and title to such property and shall relate back to the date of seizure.
The proceeding is civil in nature and the record and judgment in the criminal action is not admissible. City of Tallahassee v. In re: Forfeiture of One Yellow 1979 Fiat 2-Door Sedan, 414 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
The distinction between forfeiture and criminal proceedings has been well documented and need not be repeated. See United States v. One 1971 Chevrolet Corvette Automobile, 496 F. 2d 210 (5th Cir. 1974); In re 1972 Porsche 2 dr., 307 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); State v. DuBose, 11 So. 2d 477 (Fla.1943); One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania, 380 U.S. 693, 85 S.Ct. 1246, 14 L.Ed.2d 170 (1965); and United States v. One 1971 Harley-Davidson Motorcycle, 508 F. 2d 351 (9th Cir.1974).
We hold that the appellant (a non-party in the criminal proceeding) should be allowed to prove his case in accordance with the guidelines contained in the herein mentioned cases and that the forfeiture proceeding should not be simply determined by the outcome of the criminal proceeding. Reversed and Remanded.
BERANEK, HERSEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Forfeiture of Approximately Forty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($48, 432 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…forfeiture proceeding such as the case at bar is a civil in rem proceeding.5 [*1385] See In re Forfeiture of a 1981 Ford, 432 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); In re Forfeiture of Five Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($5,300.00), supra; Wille v. Karrh, 423 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Mark v. State, 416 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); City of Tallahassee v. One Yellow 1979 Fiat, 414 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). The burden of proof in a forfeiture proceeding is allocated in the following manner: The govern…
-
Fink v. Holt, 609 So. 2d 1333 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…ement v. Real Property, 588 So. 2d 957 (Fla.1991); Smith v. Hindery, 454 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); City of St. Petersburg v. Jewell, 489 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); City of Miami v. Barclay, 563 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Wille v. Karrh, 423 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); and Medious v. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 534 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), rev. denied, 542 So. 2d 1333 (Fla.1989). We have therefore amended the caption for this appeal, on our own motion, to identify t…
-
Rosado v. Bieluch, 827 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…2, 64 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)(“The right to damages [pursuant to the offer of judgment statute] may arise under tort law; it may arise under contract law; it may arise under property law.”). Forfeiture actions are civil proceedings. See Wille v. Karrh, 423 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); § 932.704(2), Fla. Stat. (2001) (“In each judicial circuit, all civil forfeiture cases shall be heard before a circuit court judge of the civil division ... [and][t]he Florida Rules of Civil Procedure shall govern....”). However…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- ONE 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania, 380 U.S. 693 (U.S. 1965)
- State v. Dubose, 152 Fla. 304 (Fla. 1943)
- Commodore Plaza AT Century 21 Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Schwartz, 307 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- United States v. (ONE) (1) 1971 Chevrolet Corvette Auto. Serial NO. 194371S121113, 496 F.2d 210 (5th Cir. 1974)
- United States v. ONE (1) 1971 Harley-Davidson Motorcycle Serial # 4A25791H1, 508 F.2d 351 (9th Cir. 1974)
- Swain v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 414 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)