SMITH v. STATE (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sydney SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-1211

Decided: September 15, 2021

Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LOBREE, and BOKOR, JJ.

Sydney Smith, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See § 705.105, Fla. Stat. (2017); Davis v. State, 198 So. 3d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (“Section 705.105(1) provides that the title to property seized in connection with a criminal proceeding shall vest permanently in the law enforcement agency sixty days after the conclusion of the criminal proceeding. Thus, in order to seek the return of seized property, a defendant must file a motion within that sixty-day period.”); Shirah v. State, 312 So. 3d 1054, 1055-56 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (“The 60-day vesting does not apply, however, if the property was seized for non-investigative or non-evidentiary purposes. Rather, in such cases, a 4-year statute of limitations applies. § 95.11(3)(i), Fla. Stat. (establishing 4-year statute of limitations to actions for return of property held by the State) ․”)

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network