STATE
v.
CARTER, ET AL.
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 Polk County Circuit Court ordered forfeiture of boats and a motor to the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission based on their alleged use in illegal fishing. The appellate court reversed the forfeiture of the boats and motor, holding that the statute authorizing forfeiture applies only to fishing devices themselves, not to general-purpose property capable of lawful use, while affirming the forfeiture of the haul seine.
Boats and outboard motors, being general-purpose property capable of lawful use and not declared by statute to be nuisances or included within the definition of 'fishing device,' may not be summarily forfeited by the court. Only the haul seine, which is a specific fishing implement, may be forfeited under the statute.
“There can foe no question that the legislature or Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission could declare boats and motors, when used in illegal fishing, to be nuisances, and authorize the forfeiture thereof. They have not, however, done so.”
Establishes the court's holding that while the legislature has the power to authorize boat and motor forfeiture, it has not exercised that power.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants were charged with illegal fishing in Florida's fresh waters. The criminal court ordered forfeiture of three boats, one 30 HP Johnson outboa…
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 Nuisance Per Se cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from an order of the criminal court of record of Polk County which confiscated to the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission certain personal property of the appellants, to wit—
1 14 foot plywood boat
1 12 foot cypress boat
1 14 foot Gillis plywood boat
1 30 HP Johnson Outboard Motor,
Serial No, 1397061 — Model RBE 18 E Approximately 600 yards of Haul Seine
The appellants, in their brief, abandon their assignment of errors as applied to the Haul Seine.
The order complained of recites that it is based on the provisions of section 372.31, Florida Statutes 1955, and is in conformity with the holding of the Supreme Court in Bruce v. Malloy, 7 So. 2d 123.
The writer has not been favored with a brief or citation of authorities relied on by appellee. The Malloy case does not, in my opinion, support the order entered by the long experienced and learned trial judge. The Malloy case held — “There is nothing in the record to support the ownership, or claim of ownership, on the *138part of Mr. Malloy until the early portion of July, 1941. The order of forfeiture having been entered on May 29, 1941, the judgment was final and the judge was without power to reopen the judgment as attempted on July 10, 1941.” Any referral in said opinion to boats was obiter dictum.
The order of forfeiture in this case is based on section 372.31, which declares that any illegal net, trap, or fishing device, or illegally used net, trap or fishing device found in the fresh waters of this state may foe forfeited to the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. There can foe no question that the legislature or Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission could declare boats and motors, when used in illegal fishing, to be nuisances, and authorize the forfeiture thereof. They have not, however, done so.
In ¡Smith v. Maryland, 59 U. S. 18, it was held that the state had the right to make it unlawful to take or capture oysters with a scoop or drag, and to inflict the penalty of forfeiture upon the vessel employed in this pursuit.
Likewise, if the boats and motors involved herein were being used in a manner detrimental to the interest of the public, it is within the power of the legislature or Game and Fresh Water Fish *139Commission to declare such property to 'be a nuisance and authorize its destruction or forfeiture. Not the courts.
It has not been made to appear that the term “fishing device” has been judicially, or by legislative enactment, determined to include boats and outboard motors. Such property being capable of lawful use, and not having been declared by statute to be a nuisance, may not be summarily forfeited by the court.
The order appealed from, as it declares a forfeiture of—
1 14 foot plywood boat
1 12 foot cypress boat
1 14 foot G-illis plywood boat
1 30 HP Johnson Outboard Motor, Serial No. 1397061 — Model RBE 18 E
is in error and as to such property, the cause is reversed with directions to deliver possession thereof to the appellants.
The order of confiscation as it deals with “approximately 600 yards of Haul Seine” is hereby affirmed.
Reversed in part and affirmed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs v. Bibbson Pate, 212 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)
-
Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs v. Bibbson Pate, 221 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 1969)
Authorities Cited
- Bruce v. Malloy, 150 Fla. 157 (Fla. 1942)