Supreme Court of Florida

In forfeiture proceeding against a property owner, claiming that the property was being used for criminal activity by the property owner's leaseholders, Third District's decision in Gomez is approved and the First and Fifth Districts' decisions in Forfeiture of 1993 Lexus and Baggett are disapproved as, based on the plain and unambiguous language of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, the seizing agency is not required to establish the owner's actual or constructive knowledge at the seizure stage. Rather, at the seizure stage, the agency is required to establish only that there is probably cause to believe that the property was being employed or likely to be employed in criminal activity, and establishing the owner's actual or constructive knowledge is not required until the forfeiture stage.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/08/2010
• Published 07/08/2010

Judges

• PARIENTE

Court

• Supreme Court of Florida

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Richard J. Diaz, Cynthia A. Everett