IN RE THE FORFEITURE OF ONE 1972 MAROON MERCEDES, V.I.N. 11401112012661. CHARLES B. WELLS, AS SHERIFF OF MANATEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
GUY FREEMAN, 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.
The Sheriff of Manatee County appealed the denial of vehicle forfeiture after Guy Freeman was arrested for cocaine possession while driving his car. The court reversed, holding that a vehicle may be forfeited when an individual possesses a felony amount of drugs while in the vehicle, even if the drugs are for personal use and the vehicle played no role in the drug activity.
The court held that a vehicle is subject to forfeiture when an individual possesses a felony amount of drugs while in the vehicle, regardless of whether the vehicle played any part in the drug activity or whether the drugs were intended solely for personal use.
[1] A vehicle may be forfeited when a felony amount of drugs is possessed by an individual within the vehicle, even if the drugs are intended solely for personal use.
[2] The legislature intended forfeiture to be an appropriate penalty for felony drug possession occurring within a vehicle.
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“the legislature intended for forfeiture to be an appropriate penalty where an individual possesses a felony amount of drugs while in a vehicle, even if the drugs are intended solely for personal use”
Establishes the controlling legal standard that vehicle forfeiture is proper based on in-vehicle drug possession alone, without requirement of vehicle involvement or intent to distribute
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeputy Livingston pulled over Freeman's 1972 Mercedes. Freeman exited the vehicle and ran, carrying a clear plastic bag of rock cocaine. Freeman testi…
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 Vehicle Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw
PATTERSON, Judge.
The Sheriff of Manatee County sought to have Guy Freeman’s car forfeited under section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1987), after Deputy Livingston arrested Freeman for possessing cocaine. Freeman was driving his car when Deputy Livingston pulled him over. Freeman got out of the car and ran, carrying a clear plastic bag of rock cocaine. He later testified that he was on his way to his girlfriend’s house without any intent to sell or use the drugs and did not “pull” the cocaine from anywhere in the vehicle. The trial court, relying on Crenshaw v. State, 521 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (Crenshaw I), found that the department failed to show that the car played a part in Freeman’s possession of the cocaine, and denied the forfeiture.
In State v. Crenshaw, 548 So. 2d 223 (Fla.1989), the supreme court quashed Crenshaw I, saying:
[T]he First District Court set aside the trial court’s order of a forfeiture, holding that, before there can be a forfeiture of a vehicle for a felony possession of drugs found on a person in the vehicle, there must be a showing that the vehicle played some part in the drug activity. We disagree_ We hold that the legislature intended for forfeiture to be an appropriate penalty where an individual possesses a felony amount of drugs while in a vehicle, even if the drugs are intended solely for personal use.
548 So. 2d at 224. See also, City of Clearwater v. Malick, 429 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Naples Police Dep't. v. Small, 426 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
We, therefore, reverse and remand with instructions to enter a judgment of forfeiture in favor of the Sheriff of Manatee County.
RYDER, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Crenshaw, 548 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1989)
- In re Forfeiture of the Following Described Prop.: ONE 1976 Dodge VAN v. Malick, 429 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Crenshaw v. State, 521 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- In re Forfeiture of the Following Described Prop.: 1973 Buick: Fla. Tag No. GVM-847 v. Small, 426 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)