LARRY CAMPBELL, SHERIFF OF LEON COUNTY, APPELLANT,
v.
ALSTON A. CHIN, 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.
Trial court properly returned seized currency to defendant because the sheriff's release form lacked the required written waiver of judicial review under Florida's Contraband Forfeiture Act.
A trial court has subject matter jurisdiction to determine whether seized property should be retained or returned, and currency was properly returned where the forfeiture release lacked a required written waiver of judicial review.
[1] A trial court has subject matter jurisdiction and priority jurisdiction over property seized in criminal proceedings to determine whether the property should be retained…
[2] A forfeiture release under the Contraband Forfeiture Act is invalid if it fails to contain a written waiver of the owner's right to have the agreement reviewed by the cou…
Previewing 2 of 2 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 trial court that has jurisdiction over criminal proceedings has priority jurisdiction over other courts to determine whether property seized for use in criminal proceedings is to be retained or returned to the owner.”
Court citing Daniel v. State to establish trial court jurisdiction over seized property in criminal cases.
Currency was seized from Alston A. Chin following his arrest for drug charges. The sheriff obtained a release purporting to transfer all interest in t…
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 Custodia Legis cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Larry Campbell, challenges a final order of the criminal court returning currency that was seized from Appellee, Alston A. Chin, after his arrest for drug charges. Contrary to Appellant’s argument, the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to rule on the motion, even though Appellant contended the currency was seized pursuant to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, because trial courts have inherent authority over property held in custodia legis. Daniel v. State, 991 So.2d 421, 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (holding that “[A] trial court that has jurisdiction over criminal proceedings has priority jurisdiction over other courts to determine whether property seized for use in criminal proceedings is to be retained or returned to the owner.”) Moreover, the trial court properly determined that the currency was not seized pursuant to the Forfei*476ture Act because the release signed by Appellant purporting to transfer all interest in the property to the Leon County Sheriffs Department failed to contain a written waiver of Appellee’s right to have the agreement reviewed by the court, a mediator, or an arbitrator. § 923.704(7), Fla. Stat. (2009). We, therefore, affirm the order of the trial court returning the currency to Appellee.
AFFIRMED.
DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.