LUIS GARCIA, APPELLANT,
v.
METRO-DADE POLICE DEPARTMENT, APPELLEE
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.
Garcia appeals a civil forfeiture judgment after his cocaine trafficking arrest, but the court dismisses the appeal because Garcia is a fugitive from justice. The court holds that the federal escape rule—which bars fugitives from appealing—applies to civil forfeiture cases arising from criminal charges in Florida.
The court holds that the federal escape rule applies to civil forfeiture cases in Florida when the appellant is a fugitive from justice, at least as it relates to civil forfeiture actions arising out of criminal charges. A fugitive is not entitled to call upon the resources of court for determination of his case.
[1] A fugitive from justice is not entitled to call upon the resources of a court for the determination of their case.
[2] The fugitive from justice doctrine, which bars fugitives from pursuing appeals, applies to civil forfeiture actions that arise out of criminal charges.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“A fugitive has no right whatever to frustrate the orderly procedures of the courts by voluntarily absenting himself and upon his apprehension complain that his rights were violated when his appeal was dismissed.”
Establishes the foundational principle from prior Florida case law that fugitives cannot appeal, applied here to civil forfeiture.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGarcia was arrested and charged with trafficking in cocaine but failed to appear for his criminal trial. At the time of arrest, $10,000 in currency wa…
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 Criminal Appeals cases and more on FLexlaw
GERSTEN, Judge.
Appellant, Luis Garcia, appeals a final order of forfeiture and a final judgment in favor of appellee, Metro-Dade Police Department. We grant appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal.
Appellant was arrested and charged with trafficking in cocaine, but failed to appear for his criminal court trial. At the time of the arrest, $10,000 in currency in appellant’s possession was confiscated. Although appellant is a fugitive from justice, the civil action for the forfeiture of the currency proceeded. The trial court ordered the money forfeited. Appellant appealed the forfeiture and appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal.
Appellee asserts that this appeal should be dismissed because appellant is a fugitive from justice. Appellant contends that al though the federal “escape rule” bars fugitives from justice from determining their case in federal courts, the State of Florida has not adopted such a rule.
Florida has adopted such a rule in the much stricter context of criminal defendants’ rights. In State v. Gurican, 576 So. 2d 709 (Fla.1991) the Florida Supreme Court addressed the question of whether Florida appellate courts should apply the federal escape rule, and dismiss an appeal of an accused who has fled the jurisdiction. Gurican fled the jurisdiction but sought to appeal her conviction. The Supreme Court held:
A fugitive has no right whatever to frustrate the orderly procedures of the courts by voluntarily absenting himself and upon his apprehension complain that his rights were violated when his appeal was dismissed.
Gurican, 576 So. 2d at 711 (quoting Bretti v. Wainwright, 225 So. 2d 516 (Fla.1969), approved in part, expunged in part, 255 So. 2d 266 (Fla.1971)).
In Florida, the federal escape rule clearly applies to appeals from a criminal conviction where the appellant is a fugitive. However, the issue in this case is whether the federal escape rule will be applied to civil forfeiture cases. We hold that it does.
Appellant, on the one hand, wields a sword against our judicial system by escaping criminal prosecution. On the other hand, appellant attempts to shield himself with the protection of his rights in the civil courts.
Because we find this duplicitous approach repugnant to our inherent sense of equity, we adopt the federal “fugitive from justice” doctrine cited in United States v. One Lot of U.S. Currency totalling $506,-537.00, 628 F.Supp. 1473 (S.D.Fla.1986):
[A] fugitive from justice is not entitled to call upon the resources of court for determination of his case.
We adopt this doctrine only as it relates to civil forfeiture actions that arise out of criminal charges.
Accordingly, we grant the motion to dismiss this appeal.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jaffe v. Hardy M. Snow, Jr., 610 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…l charges pending against him in this state from which he has fled rather than faced. Simply stated, “a fugitive from justice is not entitled to call upon the resources of court for determination of his case.” Garcia v. Metro-Dade Police Department, 576 So. 2d 751, 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); United States v. One Lot of U.S. Currency Totalling $506,537, 628 F.Supp. 1473, 1475 (S.D.Fla.1986). Stated another way, a fugitive from justice “cannot eat his cake and have it too.” United States v. Eng, 951 F. 2d 461, 462…
-
Tejada v. In re Forfeiture OF THE Following Described Prop.: $406, 820 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…om actions taken to return the fugitive to Florida to answer organized crime charges. We have also applied the “fugitive from justice” doctrine to civil forfeiture cases when they arise out of criminal charges. In Garcia v. Metro-Dade Police Dep't., 576 So. 2d 751, 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), we dismissed an appeal solely because the appellant failed to appear for his criminal court trial and remained a fugitive, finding his conduct duplicitous and “repugnant to our inherent sense of equity.” Id. at 752. Thus, bu…
-
Kenrick v. Coleman, 679 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…riminal charges that stemmed from the very accident that gave rise to this negligence action. As a fugitive from justice, Kenriek “is not entitled to call upon the resources of court for determination of his case.” Garcia v. Metro-Dade Police Dept., 576 So. 2d 751, 752 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); see also Jaffe v. Snow, 610 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), rev. denied, 621 So. 2d 432 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 2724, 129 L.Ed.2d 848 (1994). Unfortunately, however, we must provide defendant with thi…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Gurican, 576 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 1991)
- Bretti v. Louie L. Wainwright, 225 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 1969)
- Bretti v. Louie L. Wainwright, 255 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 1971)
- United States v. One Lot of U.S. Currency Totalling $506, 628 F. Supp. 1473 (S.D. Fla. 1986)