CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1997 WL 593912
...The state appeals from the trial judge's orders which dismissed nine counts of an amended criminal information filed against Sobieck on double jeopardy grounds. [1] He had been charged with one violation of the RICO statute, [2] based on six predicate incidents involving resale of tickets in violation of section 817.36(2)(a), and one for making a false statement in violation of section 817.36(2). Counts II, III, V, VI and VII involved resale of tickets in violation of section 817.36(2)(a), essentially repeating the RICO predicate incidents....
...ardy clause. Since criminal sanctions were being sought in a subsequent proceeding for the same acts, which triggered forfeiture and imposition of the penalties, the criminal counts based on RICO, and violations of sections
559.927,
501.201-213, and
817.36(2)(a) must be dismissed....
...767,
114 S.Ct. 1937,
128 L.Ed.2d 767 (1994); Austin v. United States,
509 U.S. 602,
113 S.Ct. 2801,
125 L.Ed.2d 488 (1993); and United States v. Halper,
490 U.S. 435,
109 S.Ct. 1892,
104 L.Ed.2d 487 (1989). We reverse. The trial court also ruled that section
817.36(2)(a), which makes the offering for sale of any ticket to any "sporting exhibition, athletic contest, theater, or any exhibition where an admission price is charged, and receives a price in excess of $1 above the retail admission price...
...§
932.701(2)5, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). Pursuant to the counterclaim filed by the state in the civil proceeding in this case, the personal property and cash were all alleged to be either property used in a business scheme or pattern to sell tickets in violation of section
817.36, or proceeds thereof....
...osed. Compare United States v. One Single Family Residence Located at 18755 North Bay Road, Miami,
13 F.3d 1493 (11th Cir.1994); Halper. III. Due Process; Equal Protection Sobieck argues on cross-appeal that the trial court erred in determining that section
817.36, Florida Statutes, does not violate the due process or equal protection clauses of the state and or federal constitutions. [9] Section
817.36(2), provides: (a) Whoever shall offer for sale or sell any ticket good for admission to any sporting exhibition, athletic contest, theater, or any exhibition where an admission price is charged and request or receive a price in excess...
...When any original seller of tickets provides a travel agency with tickets in bulk, the travel agent shall be deemed to be reselling the tickets on behalf of the original seller. The trial judge ruled that sale of tickets to the general public for the events outlined in section 817.36 was "affected with the public interest" within the meaning of Nebbia v....
...The court held the statute met the constitutional test for due process because there was a greater potential for abuse in making solicitations for law enforcement groups than other groups and the enactment addressed the potential harms found to exist. Although there is no expressly stated legislative purpose for section 817.36, this is not determinative....
...valuable servicethe availability of low-cost tickets through box office sources. The effect on the ticket market by scalpers who buy up available tickets for resale is to lessen public opportunity to buy tickets at the lowest prices. Statutes like section 817.36 are designed to prevent unfair cornering of the market and limit opportunities to manipulate prices, both of which damage the general public and the promoters of public events....
...This appears to us to be a legitimate area in which the state may impose economic regulations. See Sixty Enterprises, Inc. v. Roman & Ciro, Inc.,
601 So.2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Sobieck also argues that no rational basis exists to allow registered sellers of travel to avoid the limits of section
817.36, if they comply with the regulations and limitations contained in chapter 559, and make sales on behalf of the original seller and as part of a travel package....
