ROERME NAVARRO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1986-04-15
No. 85-1581
Before HENDRY, HUBBART and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
487 So. 2d 72 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1986) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. United States v. Jennings, 724 F. 2d 436, 445-46 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1227, 104 S.Ct. 2682, 81 L.Ed.2d 877 (1984); United States v. Ross, 719 F. 2d 615, 619-20 (2d Cir.1983); United States v. Moon, 718 F. 2d 1210, 1230 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 971, 104 S.Ct. 2344, 80 L.Ed.2d 818 (1984); Dougan v. State, 470 So. 2d 697, 700 (Fla.1985); Hitchcock v. State, 413 So. 2d 741, 744 (Fla.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 960, 103 S.Ct. 274, 74 L.Ed.2d 213 (1982).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • In re Forfeiture OF 1998 Ford Pickup v. Cal Henderson, 779 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
    …gment was improper. See Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966). We acknowledge that the State is correct that Williams’ acquittal or conviction for the underlying charge is irrelevant to a civil forfeiture action, see Vasquez v. City of Hialeah, 487 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), and that the standard of proof in criminal cases is far greater than in civil forfeiture actions, where the standard is clear and convincing evidence. See § 932.704(8), Fla. Stat. (1997). However, the trial court in this case was…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw