CARLOS ARANGO, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
IN RE FORFEITURE OF FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY DOLLARS ($477,890) IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY, 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.
Appellant Arango lacks standing to challenge the probable cause determination in a civil forfeiture action because he signed a sworn waiver of rights to the seized currency, and his subsequent claim that he earned the money through legitimate business was incredible given his prior statements to police that it represented proceeds of a Colombian narcotics operation.
A claimant who signs a sworn written waiver of rights to seized currency lacks standing to challenge the probable cause determination in a civil forfeiture action, even if the claimant later provides a detailed explanation of the currency's source.
[1] A claimant who executes a sworn written waiver of rights to seized property lacks standing to challenge the probable cause determination in a civil forfeiture action.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Although here the subsequent statement was more detailed than Salazar's conclusory 'it was my property' statement, it was nevertheless insufficient to overcome the legal effect of Arango's relinquishment of rights to the currency.”
Court explaining why Arango's detailed explanation of the currency's source could not overcome the effect of his signed waiver.
Police seized $477,890 in currency from Carlos Arango. Arango signed a sworn written waiver of rights to the seized currency but later claimed the mon…
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 Contraband cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We find that Carlos Arango has no standing to challenge the probable cause determination with regard to this civil forfeiture action. See Salazar v. In re Forfeiture of $182,289.00, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D328, 728 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). As did the claimant in Salazar, Arango signed a sworn, written waiver of rights to the seized currency, then later claimed the currency was his. Although here the subsequent statement was more detailed than Salazar’s conclusory “it was my property” statement, it was nevertheless insufficient to overcome the legal effect of Arango’s relinquishment of rights to the currency. See id. In fact, we find Arango’s subsequent claim that he earned the $477,890.00 by selling cars, automotive parts, and heavy machinery, totally incredible, especially following his statements during the seizure to the police that the money represented the proceeds of a Colombian narcotics operation.
Although we need not reach the merits on the probable cause issue, we note that there was ample probable cause here to support seizure of the currency as contraband. See In re Forfeiture of $171,900 in U.S. Currency, 711 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), and the cases cited therein.
For the reasons stated above, we dismiss Arango’s appeal, and grant the cross-appeal of the State Attorney’s Office.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vasquez v. State, 777 So. 2d 1200 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…nt could not thereafter merely state that it was his money in order to establish standing because such a conclu-sory statement did not overcome the legal effect of his prior relinquishment of rights. The claimant in Arango v. Forfeiture of $477,890, 731 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), also signed a sworn, written waiver of rights to the seized currency, then later claimed ownership of the currency. In Arango, this Court observed that the subsequent statement was more detailed than that made in Salazar, but we…
-
Chuck v. City OF Homestead Police Dep't & Vill. of Pinecrest, 888 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…standing to challenge the forfeiture proceeding. Homestead argued that the opinion was contrary to the law stated in Munoz v. City of Coral Gables, 695 So. 2d 1283, 1288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), Arango v. In re Forfeiture of $477,890.00 in U.S. Currency, 731 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), and Gonzalez v. City of Homestead, 825 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). We granted rehearing en banc. II. Facts and Proceedings Below in Case Number 01-2768 — John Toney v. Village of Pinecrest On May 31, 2001, a Village of Pine…1 / 3
-
Antoine Jean-Louis v. Forfeiture OF $203, 767 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…at Salazar v. Forfeiture of 182,289.00 in U.S. Currency, 728 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 740 So. 2d 528 (Fla.1999), and Arango v. Forfeiture of Four Hundred Seventy-Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety Dollars ($4,77,890) in U.S. Currency, 731 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), applied. The trial court found, without taking testimony, that the waiver of standing contained in the written stipulation was valid and entered an order determining that appellants had no standing because of the voluntary waiver…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Forfeiture OF ONE Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($171, 711 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- Salazar v. In re Forfeiture OF $182, 728 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)