ROBERT L. SMITH, AS CHIEF OF POLICE OF THE CITY OF TAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT, APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIS CAGGIANO, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act cases and more on FLexlaw
LEHAN, Judge.
The city of Tampa appeals from an order denying the forfeiture of a 1981 Cadillac. We reverse. The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act defines contraband to include “[a]ny ... vehicle ... which has been or is actually employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of, any felony.” See section 932.701(2)(e), Florida Statutes (1985); City of St. Petersburg Beach v. Jewell, 489 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). The Cadillac in this case was shown to have been used to transport its owner, Louis Caggiano, to a particular location where Mr. Caggiano engaged in felonious wagering activities in violation of section 842.25, Florida Statutes (1985). Accordingly, the Cadillac was contraband. See Duckham v. State, 478 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1985); One 1976 Dodge Van v. State, 447 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); In re Forfeiture of One 1979 Ford, 450 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF Edgewood v. Williams, 556 So. 2d 1390 (Fla. 1990)…review Williams v. City of Edgewood, 541 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), because of asserted conflict with Duckham v. State, 478 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1985); In re Forfeiture of One 1983 Lincoln, 497 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); and Smith v. Caggiano, 496 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).1 The issue presented is whether Williams’ car was subject to forfeiture pursuant to section 932.701(2)(e) of the Florida Statutes (1985). In July 1987, a fifteen-year-old female friend of Williams went to clean her brother’s apa…1 / 2
-
Martinez v. Heinrich, 521 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)….” 478 So. 2d at 349 (emphasis supplied). Thus, in Duckham, one can perceive a direct temporal and proximal link between the automobile and the illegal activity upon application of the “but for” test. We followed that principle in Smith v. Caggiano, 496 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986), and upheld the forfeiture of a vehicle that was used to drive to a location where felonious wagering activities occurred. In short, commission of the felony and the forfeited automobile were inextricably wedded in Duckham and Cag…
-
In re Forfeiture OF the following described Prop.: 1986 Ford PU 17TH725Y4GNA07879E228128. Harvey Brooks v. Gillum, 619 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…that appellant, after the first incident and at the time he drove the [*340] minors from motel to motel in his truck before taking them to where he lived, had formed the intent to participate in further sexual activity with them. Smith v. Caggiano, 496 So. 2d 853 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) and Duckham v. State, 478 So. 2d 347 (Fla.1985) both appear to be on point. In Smith, an automobile was subject to forfeiture because it had been used to transport its owner to the scene of felonious wagering. -And in Duckham, an…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Duckham v. State, 478 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1985)
- The City OF ST. Petersburg Beach v. Jewell, 489 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- ONE 1976 Dodge VAN v. State, 447 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- In re Forfeiture OF ONE 1979 Ford V.I.N. 9G87F167035, 450 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)