Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...Id. [7] After seizure, the state must "promptly proceed" against the property "by rule to show cause in the circuit court," and may have the property forfeited "upon producing due proof" that the property was being used in violation of the Act. Id. § 932.704(1)....

..., or if it is subject to a perfected security interest; however the requirement for notice by mail is waived with respect to perfected security interests if the owner cannot be ascertained after diligent search and inquiry by the seizing agency. Id. § 932.704(2)....

...f proving that they did not consent to having the property used to commit a crime. Id. § 932.703(3). At some point, the court is to issue a "final order of forfeiture" perfecting title in the seizing agency relating back to the date of seizure. Id. § 932.704(1). Legal title to the property, or proceeds derived from the property after satisfaction of bona fide liens, are then transferred to an agency or fund as set forth in the Act. Id. § 932.704(3)....

...tatutes, and if so, who under the law is entitled to acquire legal title to the property. [10] 1. Initial restraint on property The only action expressly authorized by the Act to initiate forfeiture is the actual seizure of the subject property, see section 932.704(1), an extreme measure because seizure effectively ousts an individual from all rights concerning the property, [11] producing particularly harsh consequences where a residence is at issue....

...te agency under the Act. However, that is the sum total of direction given by the Act. The Act does not set out any procedures for filing the petition or issuing the rule to show cause, except that a rule shall issue upon the showing of "due proof." § 932.704(1), Fla....

...SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, GRIMES, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur. APPENDIX The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, sections 932.701-.704 of the Florida Statutes (1989), provides as follows: 932.701. Short title; definition of "contraband article". — (1) Sections 932.701-932.704 shall be known and may be cited as the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act." (2) As used in ss. 932.701-932.704, "contraband article" means: (a) Any controlled substance as defined in chapter 893 or any substance, device, paraphernalia, or currency or other means of exchange which has been, is being, or is intended to be used in violation of any provision of chapter 893....

...ded without difficulty, the court shall order the forfeiture of any other property of the defendant up to the value of any property subject to forfeiture under this section. *970 (2) No property shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss. 932.701-932.704 if the owner of such property establishes that he neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that such property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity....

...that he neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that such property was employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity. (3) No bona fide lienholder's interest shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss. 932.701-932.704 if such lienholder establishes that he neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that such property was being used or was likely to be used in criminal activity; that such use was without his consent, express or implied;...

...If it appears to the satisfaction of the court that a lienholder's interest satisfies the above requirements for exemption, such lienholder's interest shall be preserved by the court by ordering the lienholder's interest to be paid from such proceeds of the sale as provided in s. 932.704(3)(a). 932.704....

...on and approval of the budget for the law enforcement agency. NOTES [1] We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(5) of the Florida Constitution. [2] Although the Act required the state to file a petition for a rule to show cause, see section 932.704(1) of the Florida Statutes (1989), the Act did not expressly require the state to seek a seizure warrant or to file a notice of lis pendens....

...Suspicionless Search or Search with Suspicion? 16 Florida law permits the seizing agent to retain the property pending appeal (although we note that the State Attorney had dropped all charges against Bruce prior to the filing of the appeal). See Fla. Stat. § 932.704(9)(a)....

...Additionally, we observe that the statute also provides that “[i]f the claimant prevails on appeal, the seizing agent shall immediately release the seized property to the person entitled to possession of the property as determined by the court, pay any costs as assessed by the court . . . .” Fla. Stat. § 932.704(9)(b). 13  Bruce’s first contention is that an administrative inspection, pursuant to an authorizing statute, must be a routine, random, suspicionless visit to a business to inspect books and records....

...932.701(2)(g), Fla. Stat. At the forfeiture proceeding, the court "shall" order the seized property forfeited to the seizing agency "[u]pon clear and convincing evidence that the contraband article was being used in violation" of the Forfeiture Act. § 932.704(8), Fla. Stat. (2002). The person contesting the forfeiture in the second stage is identified in section 932.704 as a "claimant." The class of persons who are claimants is narrower than those entitled to notice of the adversarial preliminary hearing....

...The Town of Davie initiated this case by filing a Complaint for Rule to Show Cause and for Final Order of Forfeiture. It sought the forfeiture of: $48,900.00 in U.S. currency, a Kenmore trash compactor and two scales. Prior to filing the complaint, the Town fulfilled the appropriate notice requirements of section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...with this opinion. REVERSED AND REMANDED. DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] The Act was transferred without significant revision to sections 932.701-.704, Florida Statutes (1981). All subsequent citations will be to the renumbered statute. [2] Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981), calls for a published notice of the forfeiture proceeding in a newspaper of general circulation for two consecutive weeks or notice by registered mail to known owners of the seized property and to those holding perfected security interests....

..." Barragan, 545 So.2d at 254 (citing Tribune Co. v. Cannella, 458 So.2d 1075 (Fla.1984)). The Fourth District held that the City's ordinance is preempted by the FCFA. It based this holding upon the language of the FCFA's policy statement as found in section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1995). We examine this holding by looking at the history and language of the FCFA, in particular section 932.704....

...Ch. 74-385, §§ 1-4, Laws of Fla., codified at §§ 943.41-.44, Fla. Stat. (1975). In 1980, the name of this act was changed to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act (FCFA). [4] The FCFA was later renumbered to sections 932.701-.704; and, in 1992, section 932.704 was amended to include a policy statement....

...garding an individual's right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, including, but not limited to, the illegal use of stops based on a pretext, coercive-consent searches, or a search based solely upon an individual's race or ethnicity. § 932.704(1), Fla. Stat. (2005) (emphasis added). Relying on this policy statement in section 932.704, the Fourth District held that the City's ordinance is expressly preempted by the FCFA. Specifically, the Fourth District reasoned that because section 932.704 provides that law enforcement agencies "shall utilize" the provisions of the FCFA when forfeiting contraband articles used for criminal purposes, the Legislature had expressly preempted "municipal criminal contraband forfeiture laws" to the State....

...provisions and construe related statutory provisions in harmony with one another.'" Clines v. State, 912 So.2d 550, 557 (Fla.2005) (citation omitted) (quoting Forsythe v. Longboat Key Beach Erosion Control Dist., 604 So.2d 452, 455 (Fla. 1992)). In section 932.704(1), the Legislature provides that "[i]t is the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies shall utilize the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act to deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles for criminal purposes." The term "contraband" is a defined term under the FCFA....

...Read in this manner, the FCFA's policy statement refers to contraband articles, such as vehicles, as those articles that are connected with the commission of felony offenses. Stated otherwise, for purposes of preemption, when the statutory definition of contraband is applied to the policy statement in section 932.704(1), the FCFA does not express any intent to preempt seizure and forfeiture in the context of nonfelony offenses....

...ppeal). [5] Not only does the FCFA policy statement not express an intent to preempt the entire field of seizures and forfeitures for nonfelony offenses, it neither expressly nor impliedly preempts the field of seizures and forfeitures for vehicles. Section 932.704(1) states that "[i]t is also the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies ensure that, in all seizures made under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, their officers adhere to federal and state constitutional limitations."...

...Lopez, Miami, for appellant. Thomas Guilfoyle, Miami, for appellee. Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and JORGENSON, JJ. BARKDULL, Judge. This is an appeal from a final order requiring appellant to forfeit her interest in $142,795 seized from her car pursuant to section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1985)....

...The officer, accompanied by the appellant, took the money to the station where it was counted in the appellant's presence. The duffle bag contained a total of $142,795. The cash was wrapped in rubber bands in denominations of ones, fives, tens, twenties, fifties and hundreds. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1985), the appellee filed a petition for rule to show cause seeking an order of forfeiture of the $142,795....

...determines whether the subject property shall be forfeited.'" Velez, 934 So.2d at 1164 (quoting § 932.701(2)(g), Fla. Stat. (2002)). The seizing agency must file a complaint for forfeiture within forty-five days after the seizure. §§ 932.701(2), 932.704(4), Fla....

..."At the forfeiture proceeding, the court `shall' order the seized property forfeited to the seizing agency `[u]pon clear and convincing evidence that the contraband article was being used in violation' of the Forfeiture Act." Velez, 934 So.2d at *185 1164 (citing § 932.704(8), Fla....

...iture and provided for penalties against the seizing agency when there is insufficient evidence to support a forfeiture of the property and the seizing agency has retained or restricted seized property prior *187 to forfeiture or acted in bad faith. Section 932.704(9)(b) provides: The trial court shall require the seizing agency to pay to the claimant the reasonable loss of value of the seized property when the claimant prevails at trial or on appeal and the seizing agency retained the seized property during the trial or appellate process....

...g agency's action which precipitated the forfeiture proceedings was a gross abuse of the agency's discretion.... Nothing in this subsection precludes any party from electing to seek attorney's fees and costs under chapter 57 or other applicable law. § 932.704(10), Fla....

...2d DCA 2002), which certified conflict with In re Forfeiture of One (1) 1994 Honda Prelude, 730 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We must determine the effect of the deadlines for filing forfeiture complaints that sections 932.701(2)(c) and 932.704(4), Florida Statutes (1999), impose on state agencies that seize property....

...Gallagher, 609 So.2d 24, 26 (Fla. 1992); Dep't of Law Enforcement v. Real Prop., 588 So.2d 957, 961 (Fla.1991). Therefore, any ambiguity in the statute must be construed against forfeiture. In deciding this case, we must interpret several provisions of the Act. Section 932.704(4) provides: "The seizing agency shall promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred." (Emphasis added.) Section 932.701(2)...

...days for good cause, but that this time period runs from the date of seizure. 730 So.2d at 336. The Fifth District held that the agency's failure to "promptly proceed" in its forfeiture of the vehicle required the vehicle's return to its owner. Id. Section 932.704(4) plainly states that the seizing agency "shall promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred." Promptly proceed is define...

...in question cannot be regarded as an `immaterial matter' or a `matter of convenience rather than substance.'" Id. Because the statute here provides for the deprivation of a property right, its procedural requirements cannot be regarded as immaterial or a matter of mere convenience. We hold that the requirement in section 932.704(4) to "promptly proceed" with a forfeiture action is mandatory, and that under section 932.701(2)(c), "promptly proceed" means what it says: "to file the complaint within 45 days after seizure." *375 We note that in Real Property, we...

...Among other defects, we noted that "the Act does not set out any procedures for filing the [forfeiture] petition." Id. at 966. In 1992, the Legislature substantially amended the Act in reaction to Real Property. [1] Among other things, the changes added the current definition of "promptly proceed" as the term is used in section 932.704(1), which provides that the state attorney "shall promptly proceed against the contraband article." See ch....

...Universal Supply Co., 452 So.2d 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) ( Lamar I ), rev'd, 479 So.2d 109 (Fla. 1985). In Lamar I, the Court dealt with the constitutionality of the statute as amended effective July 1, 1980. That version of the statute contained, as part of sections 932.703 and 932.704, two provisions which are pertinent to understanding the issue in the present case. Section 932.703 contained the provision: Neither replevin nor any other action to recover any interest in such property *377 shall be maintained in any court, except as provided in this act. And in section 932.704 was the provision: [The] state attorney ......

...The Fifth District then held: Where property is seized under the Forfeiture Act without a warrant, the correct remedy for the claimant prior to filing either a criminal charge arising in connection with the seizure or a forfeiture action pursuant to section 932.704 is an action in replevin....

...h District Court of Appeal held unconstitutional that part of section 932.703(1) Florida Statutes (1983), which prohibited any action for recovery of seized property subject to forfeiture under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, sections 932.701-932.704....

...May 27, 1985), (on file in state archives). Shortly after the effective date of the amendment, the supreme court rendered its decision in the Lamar appeal, reversing the fifth district and holding that due process was satisfied by the requirement in section 932.704(1) that the state attorney "promptly proceed" against the contraband....

...On these bases we think it apparent the intent of the legislature was to provide sufficient due process safeguards to ensure that the statute would pass constitutional scrutiny. While the supreme court, in addressing these concerns, later held that due process was satisfied by the language in section 932.704(1) that the state "promptly proceed against the contraband," the legislature went further by setting a specific time limit on "reasonably prompt....

...rty. Id. After seizure, the state must "promptly proceed" against the property "by rule to show cause in the circuit court," and may have the property forfeited "upon producing due proof" that the property was being used in violation of the Act. Id. § 932.704(1)....

...Phillips, Gainesville, for appellee. CORRECTED OPINION MILLS, Judge. Wayne and Vivian Smith, husband and wife, appeal from an order granting forfeiture of their interest in a pickup truck pursuant to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, Sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...ZEHMER, J., concurs specially with opinion. ZEHMER, Judge, concurring specially. While I concur in the decision of the majority, I must explain in detail my reasons for doing so. My review of numerous recent decisions involving the Florida Forfeiture Contraband Act, sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes (1981), reveals a definite shift in the direction of requiring mandatory forfeiture in all cases, with no discretion in the courts and prosecutors to excuse forfeiture in appropriate circumstances....

...The matter was tried upon the parties' stipulation of evidence, supplemented by affidavits of Vivian and Wayne Smith. The stipulation stated in part: 1. That Vivian Smith is an innocent owner as defined and contemplated under the Florida Forfeiture Statute, Florida Statute § 932.701, 932.702, 932.703, and 932.704, and as defined and contemplated in the recent Third Court of Appeal opinion In Re: 1979 Lincoln Continental Brown v....

...h as husband and wife and thus said vehicle was property owned by the marriage legally defined as property held by Vivian and Wayne Smith as tenants by the entireties. (Emphasis added.) The trial court ordered forfeiture pursuant to sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes. [2] Although obviously concerned about the equities militating against forfeiture in this case, the trial court concluded that the Smiths did not have a legally sufficient defense because sections 932.701-932.704, mandated forfeiture and left no discretion in the state attorney, the sheriff, or the court to excuse or deny forfeiture in these circumstances....

...4th DCA 1969), although admitting such decision was on point, because it felt compelled to follow the later decision in In re 1979 Lincoln Continental, 405 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). There are several reasons why the applicable forfeiture statute (§§ 932.701-932.704, Fla....

...The court, as well as the seizing official, has the power to release a seized vehicle to an innocent owner. Metropolitan Dade County v. Garcia, supra . Cf., In re Forfeiture of Alcoholic Beverages Seized from Saul's Elks Club, 440 So.2d 65 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Analysis of sections 932.701 through 932.704, in light of these principles, necessarily leads to the conclusion that the ultimate decision to order forfeiture of vehicles after seizure thereunder is discretionary, not mandatory....

...The operative language of the present forfeiture statute is similar: a motor vehicle which has been or is being used for certain illegal purposes " shall be seized" (§ 932.703(1)); the state attorney " shall promptly proceed against" such motor vehicle "and may have" such motor vehicle "forfeited" (§ 932.704(1))....

...mong several alternate courses of action. [4] Just as the juxtaposition of the words "shall" and "may" in section 943.43 was construed to mean that forfeiture is discretionary, the similar use and juxtaposition of these words in sections 932.703 and 932.704 likewise requires the same construction....

...y was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity"; "no bona fide lienholder's interest shall be forfeited" under certain conditions; and if such conditions are shown "such lienholder's interest shall be preserved by the court." Section 932.704 mandates that the state attorney "shall" promptly proceed against contraband articles, etc.; any final order of forfeiture entered by the court "shall" perfect the state's right and interest in and title to the forfeited property whic...

...all" cause notice of sale to be made; and the proceeds thereof "shall" be applied and deposited as stated in the statute; upon such sale, the state "shall" issue title certificates; and certain reports "shall" be kept and submitted. [4] For example, section 932.704 uses the word "may" to describe the following obviously discretionary acts: The state attorney, "or such attorney as may be employed by the seizing agency," shall promptly proceed "against the contraband article," etc.; such attorney...

...Neither replevin nor any other action to recover any interest in such property shall be maintained in any court, except as provided in this act. (Emphasis added.) The only action for recovery of property provided in the act is by a state attorney for the benefit of the state. § 932.704(1), Fla....

...Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663, 94 S.Ct. 2080, 40 L.Ed.2d 452 (1974). The due process rights of claimants are adequately protected, therefore, by the requirement that the state attorney promptly file a forfeiture action following seizure. § 932.704(1), Fla....

...The point at issue under both circumstances is whether the claimant's due process rights have been violated by an unreasonable delay in securing a judicial determination of his rights in the seized property. We hold that due process is met provided that the claimant is afforded a reasonably prompt hearing as required by section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1983)....

...The circuit court, however, found that Byrom lacked standing to contest the forfeiture of the airplane, and thus issued a forfeiture judgment on December 5, 1989. Byrom appealed to the Fifth District Court of Appeal which upheld the trial court. The Fifth District Court of Appeal found that section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1987), allowed Sheriff Gallagher to perfect title in the airplane at the time of its seizure *26 on November 7, 1988....

...NOTES [1] Chapter 895 is known as the Florida RICO Act. Section 895.05, Florida Statutes, provides for forfeiture of real property and sets out the procedures for such forfeitures. The action filed here must be distinguished from those cases brought under sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes, which is known as the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. The procedures for these latter actions are set forth in section 932.704, Florida Statutes, and have further been clarified by judicial decision....

...On August 17, 1999, appellant, through counsel, sent a Notice of Claim and Request for Adversarial Preliminary Hearing to the city by certified mail. On August 25, 1999, the city filed a forfeiture complaint and verified supporting affidavits pursuant to sections 932.701 through 932.704, Florida Statutes....

...y "defend the case" and effectively argue his suppression motion. The city responds that the forfeiture statute does not require it to file or serve the forfeiture complaint and verified affidavits prior to the adversarial preliminary hearing. Under section 932.704(4), Florida Statutes, the seizing agency must file the complaint within forty-five (45) days after seizure....

...4th DCA 1996); Cochran v. Harris, 654 So.2d 969 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (stating that forfeiture statute is to be strictly construed). Under the forfeiture act, only a "person entitled to notice" has the right to an adversarial preliminary hearing. See §§ 932.703(2)(a),(b), 932.704(5)(b)....

...of a "claimant" at a forfeiture hearing. To qualify as a "claimant," a party opposing forfeiture has the burden of establishing both a "proprietary interest" in the property seized and "standing" to challenge the forfeiture. See §§ 932.701(2)(h), 932.704, Fla....

...We reverse that portion of the trial court's order directed at the contents of box 4178. On remand, the trial court shall make a de novo probable cause determination as if no person entitled to notice had requested a preliminary hearing, pursuant to section 932.704(5)(b), Florida Statutes (1995)....

...We review the decision in Wheels Unlimited, Inc. v. Lamar, 492 So.2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), because of its conflict with In re Forfeiture of One 1946 Lockheed L-18 Loadstar, 493 So.2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Pursuant to sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes (1985), the Sheriff of Orange County sued to forfeit an automobile which had been seized as allegedly being used as an instrumentality in the commission of a crime involving controlled substances....

...1985). We approve the principle of Lockheed and find it applicable to the case at hand. The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act provides in section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (1985): No property shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss. 932.701-932.704 if the owner of such property establishes that he neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that such property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity....

...o chapter 319 or who falls within one of the enumerated statutory exceptions. [3] Our ruling is consistent with those decisions which hold that parties seeking to claim a lienholder's interest in motor vehicles being forfeited under sections 932.701-932.704 must have recorded their liens with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles....

...rson, who has an equitable lien against the vehicle, from presenting his claim in a forfeiture proceeding. I do not find the party in this case to be innocent or to have an equitable claim. BARKETT, Justice, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. Under section 932.704, Florida Statutes, which must be strictly construed, notice of forfeiture proceedings is to be given to "all others who claim an interest" in the subject property....

...It is clear to us from certain provisions of Chapter 932 that it was contemplated that standing could be conferred only upon the actual or titled owner(s) of the seized property or on those parties who had a perfected security interest to the property. See § 932.704(6)(a) and (c), Fla....

...ust be made in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the seizing agency. The seizing agency shall set and notice the hearing, which must be held within 10 days after the request is received or as soon as practicable thereafter. [3] Section 932.704(6)(a) and (c) provide in relevant part that: (6)(a) If the property is required by law to be titled or registered, or if the owner of the property is known in fact to the seizing agency, or if the seized property is subject to a perfe...

...ermine whether probable cause exists to believe the property is contraband. § 932.703, Fla. Stat. (1997). The ultimate issue of forfeiture must be decided by a jury, unless the right to a jury has been waived by the party whose property was seized. § 932.704(3), Fla....

...criminal action. In re Forfeiture of 1987 Ford Escort v. Potts, 624 So.2d 385 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); In re Forfeiture of 1986 Pontiac Firebird v. Burgess, 600 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Navarro v. Kohan, 566 So.2d 895 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). See also § 932.704(2) (all civil forfeiture cases to be heard before a circuit judge of the civil division and the rules of civil procedure govern)....

...ng the evidence to the state. However, we do not think that ends the matter. The state should not be *1370 permitted to retain Kern's property indefinitely. If the state wishes to forfeit the property, it must file forfeiture proceedings pursuant to section 932.704....

...[2] Section 933.14(1), Florida Statutes (1995) provides for the return of property taken pursuant to a search warrant. However, it states that "in no instance shall contraband ... be returned to anyone claiming an interest therein ..." (emphasis added) [3] § 932.704(4), Fla....

...levant to know whether the owner had given the men permission to stop by the townhouse. With these minor observations, I join the majority opinion. NOTES [1] See § 932.701-.707, Fla. Stat. (2004). [2] See § 901.151, Fla. Stat. (2004). [3] See also § 932.704(1), Fla....

...or Damages pursuant to Section 60.07." We find no support for this assertion in the record. Because Pondella voluntarily dismissed this counterclaim, we affirm the dismissal with prejudice. *722 Forfeiture Claim In this count, Pondella alleged that "Section 932.704, Fla....

...s, fees and costs." The lower court dismissed this claim, finding essentially that the 1993 version of that statute, in effect when the State commenced the forfeiture proceeding, did not provide for such damages under the circumstances of this case. Section 932.704(9)(b), Florida Statutes (1993) provided for the following damages: (b) When the claimant prevails at the conclusion of the forfeiture proceeding, any decision to appeal must be made by the chief administrative official of the seizing agency....

...y during the trial or appellate process. The trial court shall also require the seizing agency to pay to the claimant any loss of income directly attributed to the continued seizure of income-producing property during the trial or appellate process. § 932.704(9)(b), Fla....

...In the absence of clear legislative intent, a law affecting substantive rights is presumed to apply prospectively only while procedural or remedial statutes are presumed to operate retrospectively. Basel v. McFarland & Sons, Inc., 815 So.2d 687, 692 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). The amendments to section 932.704(9)(b) were enacted in Chapter 95-265, Laws of Florida, which stated, "this act shall take effect upon becoming law," which occurred on June 13, 1995, when the act was approved by the governor....

...e amount of attorneys fees recoverable in certain actions was not retroactive. The court noted that a substantive amendment is one that creates or increases a substantive legal right or obligation. Id. at 1098. Under this standard, the amendments to section 932.704(9)(b) were substantive because they expanded the right of property owners to collect damages in cases that did not get appealed....

...of a competent court.” Adams, 126 Fla. at 695 , 172 So. at 79 . The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, under which the state brought its forfeiture action, gives the state circuit court jurisdiction over property seized for forfeiture. 2 Fla.Stat. § 932.704; see also Department of Law Enforcement v....

...a Contraband Forfeiture Act if it is applied consistent with the due process requirements set forth in the opinion). Under the statutory scheme, the court must enter a “final order of forfeiture,” or otherwise direct disposition of the property. § 932.704(1), (3)(b)....

...District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. November 10, 1983. Ernest M. Page, III, Asst. State Atty., Live Oak, for appellant. Donald K. Rudser, Jasper, for appellee. ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Judge. The state appeals from a circuit court order dismissing the state's civil proceedings, sec. 932.704, Fla....

...urn the goods to the owner Cobb, as necessarily implied by that statute, upon his acquittal or discharge of the offense charged. The state could not then, the court ruled, seek civil forfeiture of the same liquor as contraband for like reasons under section 932.704. Alternatively the court held that the state *66 did not satisfy the requirement of 932.704 that the state "promptly proceed against the contraband article" seized, in that the state seized the liquor by warrant on June 30, 1982, but did not begin civil forfeiture proceedings until January 4, 1983....

...The next day Cobb moved in county court for return of the property seized, and on January 5 the state initiated civil proceedings in circuit court pursuant to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, sections 932.701 et seq. Alcoholic beverages kept for illegal sale are contraband subject to the Act. Sec. 932.701(2)(c). Section 932.704(1) provides in part: The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the contraband article, ......

...We find no other basis for concluding that by prosecuting Cobb the State elected to forego authorized remedies of civil forfeiture. The circuit court's alternative ground for dismissing these chapter 932 proceedings is that, as appears in the excerpt of section 932.704(1) quoted above, the state attorney is directed to "promptly proceed against the contraband article" after its seizure....

...d not have released the vehicle to either Shelby or Mercer thereafter. It thus follows that Oakland failed to give Mercer notice of the seizure of the truck within the five days provided by section 932.703(2)(a). [3] It also follows that pursuant to section 932.704(4), Oakland's complaint to forfeit the truck, filed on December 19, 2000, was untimely. Section 932.704(4) requires a seizing agency to "promptly proceed" by filing a complaint in order to effect a forfeiture....

...I concur with this court's opinion affirming the trial court's order because I am bound to follow our earlier opinion in In re Forfeiture of One (1) 1994 Honda Prelude, 730 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). However, I believe Honda Prelude merits reexamination. Section 932.704(4), Florida Statutes (2001), requires a seizing agency to "promptly proceed" with a civil forfeiture action by filing a forfeiture complaint within 45 days following a property seizure....

...Int'l Trade 612, 615 (1988) (holding that a statutory time period is not mandatory unless it both expressly requires an agency or public official to act within a particular time period and specifies a consequence for failure to comply with the provisions), aff'd, 884 F.2d 563 (Fed.Cir.1989). While section 932.704(4) requires the seizing agency to "promptly proceed" against the seized property by filing a forfeiture action in the circuit court, the Legislature has not specified any sanction for the failure to proceed "promptly." Consequently, I believe the sanction of dismissal we opted for in Honda Prelude is unwarranted....

...4, the statutes at issue)). Based on the reasoning of James Daniel Good Real Property and Lincoln Town Car, if not for our opinion in Honda Prelude, I would conclude that because the Legislature has not specified a consequence for noncompliance with section 932.704(4), it did not intend to require dismissal of a forfeiture action for noncompliance with the 45-day deadline....

...Although the legislative history provides little guidance as to the legislature's intent, after reviewing section 328.05(3), we find that it is partly punitive in nature. First, section 328.05(3)(c) provides that the forfeiture is pursuant to sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes (1995), the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act." Therefore, section 328.05(3)(c) must be construed in pari materia with sections 932.701-932.704. Section 932.704(1) provides that the policy of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act is to "deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles for criminal purposes while protecting the proprietary interests of innocent owners...." In United States v....

...A violation of any provision of this subsection with respect to any vessel shall constitute such vessel as contraband which may be seized by a law enforcement agency, or the division, and which shall be subject to forfeiture pursuant to ss. 932.701-932.704.

...and Forfeiture Act. [6] The Act provides for the seizure of "any vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, and other personal property" carrying contraband. § 932.703. It requires that the State promptly institute proceedings to forfeit the seized property. § 932.704(1)....

...cause certificate, no forfeiture proceeding can go forward under the Florida scheme without a determination that probable cause existed. Following a seizure, the State must promptly proceed against the property by petition for a rule to show cause. § 932.704(1), Fla....

...Section 932.702 makes it unlawful to transport, carry, or convey any contraband article upon any vessel. Section 932.703 provides for the seizure of a vessel used in violation of Section 932.702 and makes the vessel subject to the forfeiture proceedings outlined in Section 932.704....

Personal Property Found Therein." Although section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1991), provides that

...Neither replevin nor any other action to recover any interest in such property shall be maintained in any court, except as provided in this act. (Emphasis added.) The reference in the last sentence to an action for recovery of property "as provided in this act" is clarified by section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1983), which provides: (1) The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal property has been seized because of its use or attempted use in violation of any provisions of law dealing with contraband ......

...tutes, *630 quoted above, precludes an action in replevin and that the only recourse available to a claimant of seized property, Universal in the instant case, is to successfully defend a forfeiture action initiated by the state attorney pursuant to section 932.704....

...ited States Constitution in support of its argument that the sheriff cannot seize its property and keep it without hearing until such time as the state attorney, at his leisure, decides to file a forfeiture action. The "prompt filing" requirement of section 932.704(1) is insufficient protection, says Universal, particularly in view of the propensity of courts to construe the term on a case-by-case basis which may permit the state as long as six months' delay....

...The issue in Sandidge and in Cobb was whether or not the six-month delay between seizure and filing, absent any showing of prejudice by the claimant — or demand for hearing — would automatically defeat the forfeiture action because of a failure by the state attorney to "promptly proceed" as required by section 932.704....

...provided in this act. Where property is seized under the Forfeiture Act without a warrant, the correct remedy for the claimant prior to the filing of either a criminal charge arising in connection with the seizure or a forfeiture action pursuant to section 932.704, is an action in replevin....

...plication for return of property pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.060(a). In effect, this would be a common law plea in abatement known as autre action pendant. [4] Failure by the sheriff to perfect his claimed title, as contemplated by section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1983), in the pending replevin action would foreclose any subsequent forfeiture action based on principles of collateral estoppel....

...*324 The Village of Pinecrest Police Department ("Pinecrest Police Department") discovered marijuana plants and a hydroponics system inside a house owned by Gomez. Thereafter, the Village of Pinecrest ("Pinecrest"), as the seizing agency, notified Gomez that, pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (2007), the real property may be seized, and that she had the right to demand an adversarial preliminary hearing under section 932.703(2)(a)....

...vided for penalties to be imposed against a seizing agency where insufficient evidence is submitted to support a forfeiture of the property and the seizing agency has retained or restricted seized property prior to forfeiture, or acted in bad faith. Section 932.704(9)(b) provides, in pertinent part: The trial court shall require the seizing agency to pay to the claimant the reasonable loss of value of the seized property when the claimant prevails at trial or on appeal and the seizing agency retained the seized property during the trial or appellate process....

...The majority seeks to avoid the natural workings of Mercedes-Benz on the theory it is a "second stage" case. See supra p. 328 (distinguishing between the "first stage" and "second stage" of a forfeiture case). Together, the two stages constitute a "Forfeiture proceeding" as described in section 932.704 of the Florida Statutes....

...The Act applies to all law enforcement agencies including municipal police departments. See § 932.7055(4), Fla. Stat. (2002). The Act states that law enforcement agencies "shall" use the provisions of the Forfeiture Act to seize contraband used for criminal purposes. See § 932.704(1), Fla. Stat. (2002). [1] According to section 932.704(1) of the Forfeiture Act, It is the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies shall utilize the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act to deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles for criminal pu...

...Thus, we believe the facts of this case set out a stronger scenario for preemption by state law than the facts of the Fourth District's case. [2] In addition to the preemption of the forfeiture issue, we agree with the Fourth District in Mulligan that the ordinance conflicts with Forfeiture Act, section 932.704(2)-(4), providing for judicial proceedings, instead of an administrative agency, and for jury trials.

...civil forfeitures. Her position, reduced to its essence, is that because this action grows out of alleged criminal activity, it is not truly civil, and the automatic stay language should not apply. *414 She faces a major problem with this argument. Section 932.704(2), Florida Statutes (2004), indicates that "all civil forfeiture cases shall be heard before a circuit court judge of the civil division," if one is established, and that the "Florida Rules of Civil Procedure shall govern forfeiture proceedings," under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act....

...igant against the state should have no fear that his or her judgment will remain collectible if the state loses its appeal, no bond is necessary. The policy considerations underpinning the automatic stay do, however, apply to forfeiture proceedings. Section 932.704(9), Florida Statutes (2004), specifically provides for monetary relief, including attorney's fees, for persons who prevail against the government in civil forfeitures....

...It was stipulated that the boat carried contraband at the time of the stop. The trial court summarily denied the petition by adopting the holding in a companion criminal proceeding that the contraband in question was seized as a result of an illegal search and seizure. Section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1981), provides: The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal property has been seized because of its use or attempted use in violation o...

...f illegal activity (as the City claimed) or proceeds of legal business activity (as Gonzalez contended). Under the statute, "[a]ny trial on the ultimate issue of forfeiture shall be decided by a jury, unless such right is waived by the claimant...." § 932.704(3), Fla....

...X is a drug dealer and has $100,000 in proceeds of the drug business. The $100,000 is seized. Mr. X has standing because it is his money. The money is subject to forfeiture, however, because it is the proceeds of illegal activity. See §§ 932.701(2)(a), 932.703(1), (6), 932.704(8), Fla....

...We next consider that part of the trial court's order which states, "The documents presented by Claimant, Vladimir Gonzalez, did not make sense and were made up for this case." A forfeiture case proceeds in accordance with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. § 932.704(2), Fla....

...UPCHURCH, Jr., Judge. Lawson Lamar, as Sheriff of Orange County, appeals a final judgment denying forfeiture of a 1976 Chevrolet Corvette owned by Karin Hayes. The sole question in this case is who has the initial burden of proof in a forfeiture action. Section 932.704(2), Florida Statutes (1981), provides the only legislative guidance for the courts to follow in forfeiture *308 of property for which title or registration is required....

...d in the pleadings. Indialantic, 677 So.2d at 1309 (footnote omitted). Consistent with Indialantic, we hold that the lower court erred in failing to consider the Fourth Amendment issue in determining whether there was probable cause. Florida Statute section 932.704(1)(1997) provides in part that: It is also the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies ensure that, in all seizures made under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, their officers adhere to federal and state constitutional...

...A copy of the petition and rule to show cause shall be served on all interested parties, and the rule to show cause shall require that responsive pleadings and affirmative defenses be filed within 20 days of service of the rule to show cause. See 588 So.2d at 966-67; see also § 932.704, Fla....

...on of his vehicle, damages relating to any deterioration or damage to the vehicle while being seized and retained by the FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES & HIGHWAY SAFETY, costs of this action, and attorney's fees, pursuant to Section 57.105 and Section 932.704, Florida Statutes....

...truck knowing she had no license is a misdemeanor of the second degree. See § 322.36, Fla. Stat (1991). [2] Cox next urges that the trial court erred by dismissing his counterclaim for damages. He asserts that the counterclaim was compulsory under section 932.704(9), Florida Statutes (2001)....

...He further asserts that his damage claim is not precluded by Wheeler v. Corbin, 546 So.2d 723 (Fla.1989), which indicated that loss of use damages are not available in tort actions involving a forfeiture. The right to damages in a case involving wrongful forfeiture is controlled by section 932.704, Florida Statutes (2001): (9)(a) When the claimant prevails at the conclusion of the forfeiture proceeding, if the seizing agency decides not to appeal, the seized property shall be released immediately to the person entitled to possession of the property as determined by the court....

...on of his vehicle, damages relating to any deterioration or damage to the vehicle while being seized and retained by the FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES & HIGHWAY SAFETY, costs of this action, and attorney's fees, pursuant to Section 57.105 and Section 932.704, Florida Statutes....

...ction 932.703. *646 Id. 546 So.2d at 725. In this case, although Cox does not concede it, we have determined that the seizure was in fact supported by probable cause. Nonetheless, at least some of Cox's remaining claims do appear to be authorized by section 932.704(9)(b), Florida Statutes (2001)....

...Beary, 758 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). The statute permits the recovery of "the reasonable loss of value of the seized property when the claimant prevails at trial or on appeal and the seizing agency retained the seized property during the trial or appellate process." § 932.704(9)(b), Fla....

...We do not have this statement in the record, but assuming this was said, confusion on this issue is understandable because of uncertain case law concerning the availability of an independent action. In any event, our Pondella Hall for Hire case clarified the status of a section 932.704 claim....

...The fact may limit damages but does not necessarily eliminate them. Here, the court gave approval for the DHSMV to voluntarily dismiss the forfeiture action, but it was error to dismiss the entire action with prejudice. Cox should have an opportunity to replead to try to state a cause of action under section 932.704, Florida Statutes (2001)....

...e protecting the proprietary interests of innocent owners and lienholders, and to authorize such law enforcement agencies to use the proceeds collected under the Florida Contraband and Forfeiture Act as supplemental funding for authorized purposes." § 932.704(1), Fla....

...But the statute states the potential for obtaining revenues from forfeitures is not its overriding purpose. The procedure set forth to be used is civil, and the case must proceed before a circuit judge in the civil division with the Florida Rules of Civil procedure governing. § 932.704(2), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). Thus the Legislature's intent that the forfeiture be a civil remedy is express. Chapter 932 further provides that the ultimate issue of forfeiture shall be decided by a jury, unless such right is waived. § 932.704(3), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). And the seizing agency proceeds against the contraband article by filing a complaint. § 932.704(4), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). Notice must be given to persons who may claim an interest in the subject property. § 932.704(5), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1996). The state has to show by clear and convincing evidence that the contraband article was being used in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. § 932.704(8), Fla....

...Here, as alleged in the complaint, a uniformed narcotics officer advised the owners of real property that their property was being seized pursuant to the state forfeiture act and the owners were thus instructed to execute a quitclaim deed. That forfeiture proceedings pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes, had not and would not be followed was not a matter obviously knowable'to the Smiths at that time....

...unt of $25,000 to be retained by the Sheriff. The Sheriff through silence rejected the offer and proceeded to trial. The jury rendered a verdict in appellants' favor. Appellants filed a Motion for Judgment for Damages against the Sheriff pursuant to section 932.704(9) of the forfeiture act....

...[2] The trial court granted the motion, awarding Orlando Rosado $2,116.50, Caribair $19,239.00, and Orlando Rosado and Rafael Rosado jointly $6,649.50. Appellants next filed an omnibus motion requesting attorneys' fees from the Sheriff pursuant to section 932.704(10) of the forfeiture act....

...4th DCA 1995)("The right to damages [pursuant to the offer of judgment statute] may arise under tort law; it may arise under contract law; it may arise under property law."). Forfeiture actions are civil proceedings. See Wille v. Karrh, 423 So.2d 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); § 932.704(2), Fla....

...As an in rem proceeding, a forfeiture action is not a "civil action for damages." See Black's Law Dictionary 793 (6th ed.1990) (explaining that the purpose of an in rem proceeding "is to determine title to or to affect interests in specific property"). We reject appellants' argument that section 932.704(9) of the forfeiture act, requiring the seizing agency to pay to the claimant the reasonable loss of value and income of the seized property when the claimant prevails at trial, converts a forfeiture proceeding into a civil action for damages....

...t valid in this action seeking to revoke a will." Id. We conclude that appellants' claims for loss of use and loss of income arise out of the forfeiture act itself and do not furnish a basis for attorney's fees other than as provided for in the act. Section 932.704(10) of the forfeiture act provides, When the claimant prevails, at the close of forfeiture proceedings and any appeal, the court shall award reasonable trial attorney's fees and costs to the claimant if the court finds that the seizin...

...The court may order the seizing agency to pay the awarded attorney's fees and costs from the appropriate contraband forfeiture trust fund. Nothing in this subsection precludes any party *1118 from electing to seek attorney's fees and costs under chapter 57 or other applicable law. § 932.704(10), Fla. Stat. (2001)(emphasis added). Here, appellants tried to recover fees by showing bad faith or a gross abuse of discretion by the Sheriff but were unsuccessful. Appellants also argue that the final sentence of section 932.704(10) should be interpreted to include claims for attorney's fees pursuant to the offer of judgment statute. We interpret this part of section 932.704(10) to apply to collateral actions brought as a result of the forfeiture proceedings, i.e....

...during the trial or appellate process. The trial court shall also require the seizing agency to pay to the claimant any loss of income directly attributed to the continued seizure of income-producing property during the trial or appellate process." § 932.704(9)(b), Fla....

...He also testified that the Prelude had not been reported to have been stolen. Respondent argued at the hearing that the Prelude had been seized as evidence in a criminal investigation and was therefore not subject to the filing requirements of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1997) requires the seizing agency to "promptly proceed" in its forfeiture of contraband by filing a complaint in the trial court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or offense occurred....

...identity of the motor vehicle or mobile home cannot be determined, the motor vehicle or mobile home shall constitute contraband and shall be subject to forfeiture by a seizing law enforcement agency, pursuant to applicable provisions of ss. 932.701-932.704.......

...nal investigation. It is well established that forfeiture statutes are to be strictly construed. See Cochran v. Jones, 707 So.2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Because respondent failed to "promptly proceed" in its forfeiture of the vehicle as required by section 932.704, petitioner's petition for writ of prohibition is granted, the writ is issued, the trial court shall proceed no further except to cause the return of the vehicle to petitioner....

...*549 In this case, Butler is unable to establish a clear legal right to the return of his property. He acknowledges in his petition that a final judgment of forfeiture has been entered by the trial court. The judgment perfected title to Butler's property in the City of Melbourne Police Department. See § 932.704(8), Fla....

...ile license suspended, with two or more prior convictions for driving while license suspended or revoked." Allen filed her answer to the forfeiture complaint, asserting, among other things, a claim for attorney's fees pursuant to sections 57.105 and 932.704, Florida Statutes (2002)....

...nfraction. Before the scheduled hearing on the summary judgment motion, the City dismissed its forfeiture complaint. The jeep was subsequently returned to Allen. Allen filed a motion for determination of entitlement to attorney's fees under sections 932.704 and 57.105. In its order *225 denying fees, the trial court stated that section 932.704(10) permits a court to award reasonable attorney's fees and costs to the claimant if it finds that the seizing agency has not acted in good faith or that the seizing agency's action was a gross abuse of discretion....

...old that Allen is entitled to an award of attorney's fees under section 57.105(1). Having determined that Allen is entitled to attorney's fees under section 57.105, we decline to reach the issue as to whether she would also be entitled to fees under section 932.704(10)....

...MANATEE COUNTY for the Use and Benefit of the MANATEE COUNTY SHERIFF's DEPARTMENT, Appellee. No. 83-2277. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. June 8, 1984. Terence Matthews, Bradenton, for appellant. No appearance for appellee. LEHAN, Judge. This proceeding for the forfeiture of an automobile, pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981), resulted in a final *1061 judgment releasing the automobile to its owner....

...that purpose. Our conclusion is consistent with the foregoing characterization of forfeiture proceedings as civil in nature and with section 57.041, Florida Statutes (1981), providing for the award of legal costs and charges to the prevailing party. Section 932.704(3) refers to storage fees in forfeiture proceedings in the context of costs....

...*748 Leon Rolle, Miami, for appellant. Thomas Guilfoyle, Miami, for appellees. Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and NESBITT, JJ. BARKDULL, Judge. This is an appeal from a final order requiring the appellant to forfeit his interest in $31,015.00 pursuant to the provisions of section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1985)....

...ture of 1978 Chevrolet Van, 493 So.2d 433 (Fla.1986). See Dep't of Law Enforcement, 588 So.2d at 967. The Florida Supreme Court stated that this substantive right was subsumed within Article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution. Id. Furthermore, section 932.704(1) of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act provides in pertinent part, "It is also the policy of this State that law enforcement agencies ensure that, in all seizures made under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, the officers adh...

...egal activity (as the City claimed) or *748 proceeds of legal business activity (as Gonzalez contended). Under the statute, "[a]ny trial on the ultimate issue of forfeiture shall be decided by a jury, unless such right is waived by the claimant...." § 932.704(3), Fla....

...The court may order the seizing agency to pay the awarded attorney’s fees and costs from the appropriate contraband forfeiture trust fund. Nothing in this subsection precludes any party from electing to seek attorney’s fees and costs under chapter 57 or other applicable law. § 932.704(10), Fla....

...We grant Appellants’ motion as it pertains to appellate attorney’s fees and remand to the trial court to determine the amount. However, we dismiss without prejudice Appellants’ motion as it pertains to damages, for Appellants to seek damages pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (2013), in the trial court....

...� standard in section 119.12 and knows how to use “good faith” standards in attorney’s fee provisions. Compare § 119.12, .Fla. Stat. (providing for attorney’s fees within the Public Records Act without using “good faith” language), with § 932.704(10), Fla....

...Laforet, 658 So.2d at 61 (court must refuse to apply statute retroactively if it impairs vested rights, creates new obligations, or imposes new penalties). When Tejada timely filed his answer in 1998, he had statutorily secured his claim to contest the forfeiture. See § 932.704(c), Fla....

...[7] This section provides: The court shall require any claimant who desires to contest the forfeiture to file and serve upon the attorney representing the seizing agency any responsive pleadings and affirmative defenses within 20 days after receipt of the complaint and probable cause finding. § 932.704(c), Fla....

...2, 1999, and the complaint for forfeiture was filed on November 4, 1999, the Sheriff failed to promptly proceed in instituting the forfeiture proceeding within forty-five days after the seizure, as required by sections 932.701(2)(c), 932.703(3), and 932.704(4), Florida Statutes (1999)....

...Because our reversal of the summary final judgment reinstates the forfeiture proceeding, we next need to decide whether the Sheriff's failure to file the forfeiture complaint within forty-five days after seizure divested the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. Section 932.704(4), Florida Statutes (1999), requires that the seizing agency "promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred." "Promptly pr...

...on a finding that the property seized was in fact being used in violation of the Act and is thus forfeitable. (Emphasis added.) As with the arrest of a person, the seizure of property under the forfeiture act must be based on probable cause. See id. Section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1985), states that following a seizure, the state "shall promptly proceed against the contraband ......

...Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663, 94 S.Ct. 2080, 40 L.Ed.2d 452 (1974). The due process rights of claimants are adequately protected, therefore, by the requirement that the state attorney promptly file a forfeiture action following seizure. § 932.704(1), Fla....

...Floyd argues that the trial court erred in finding that the amended verified complaint, properly identifying the Firebird as having been used in a robbery of the Citizens Bank in April 2008, related back to the date of the initial complaint for filing deadline purposes. Section 932.704, entitled “Forfeiture proceedings,” provides in part: “The seizing agency shall promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred.” § 932.704(4)....

...Balkwill, 853 So.2d 371, 374 (Fla.2003), the Florida Supreme Court held: Because the statute here provides for the deprivation of a property right, its procedural requirements cannot be regarded as immaterial or a matter of mere convenience. We hold that the requirement in section 932.704(4) to “promptly proceed” with a forfeiture action is mandatory, and that under section 932.701(2)(c), “promptly proceed” means what it says: “to file the complaint within 45 days after seizure.” Florida Rule of Civil Proce...

...ent agencies shall utilize the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act to deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles for criminal purposes while protecting the proprietary interests of innocent owners and lienholders...." § 932.704(1), Fla....

...Because the ordinance purports to authorize the forfeiture of motor vehicles used in connection with mere misdemeanors, it is in direct conflict with FCFA's limitation to felonies. Apart from a preemption of the forfeiture area, we also note the ordinance conflicts with FCFA section 932.704(2)-(4) providing for judicial proceedings, instead of an administrative agency, and for jury trials....

..."It is the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies shall utilize the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act to deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles for criminal purposes while protecting the proprietary interests of innocent owners and lienholders...." § 932.704(1), Fla....

...Clearly, money obtained in violation of chapter 893, Florida Statutes (2000), is subject to forfeiture. See § 932.701(2)(a)(1). However, chapter 932 requires the seizing agency to promptly proceed against the contraband by filing a complaint in circuit court. § 932.704(4). Further, a claimant, such as Cloud, is entitled to contest the forfeiture and file responsive pleadings and affirmative defenses. § 932.704(5)(c). From this record, we are unable to determine whether Cloud's motion was properly denied. It could be that the Florida Highway Patrol petitioned for forfeiture of this money in the circuit court in compliance with section 932.704(4), and that the circuit court entered a final order of forfeiture....

...sufficient to establish probable cause. The FCFA provides the State with a method for seeking civil forfeiture of contraband. A FCFA proceeding begins when the State seizes the property and files a complaint in the circuit court. §§ 932.703(2)(b), 932.704(4), Fla....

...as used, is being used, was attempted to be used, or was intended to be used” in violation of the FCFA. § 932.703(2)(c), Fla. Stat. If the court determines that probable cause exists, a jury trial will be held on the ultimate issue of forfeiture. § 932.704(3), Fla....

...n of section 932.702. The second sentence provides that title to contraband articles used in violation of section 932.702 should vest in the state upon seizure, "subject only to perfection of title, rights and interests in accordance with this act." Section 932.704 outlines the procedure for the forfeiture of any contraband article used in violation of the provisions of the law dealing with contraband....

...[2] Since Montgomery used his jeep to aid in the commission of the felony of grand theft, it was subject to forfeiture. AFFIRMED. RYDER, J., and NELSON, WILLIAM J., Associate Judge, concur. NOTES [1] Short title; definition of "contraband article". — (1) Sections 932.701-932.704 shall be known and may be cited as the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act." (2) As used in ss. 932.701-932.704, "contraband article" means: (a) Any controlled substance as defined in chapter 893 or any substance, device, paraphernalia, or currency or other means of exchange which has been, is being, or is intended to be used in violation of any provision of chapter 893....

...eing used or was intended to be used in a manner to facilitate the transportation, carriage, conveyance, concealment, receipt, possession, purchase, sale, barter, exchange, or giving away of a contraband article defined in s. 932.701(2)(a)-(d). .... 932.704 Forfeiture proceedings....

...No appearance for respondents. PER CURIAM. We treat this non-final appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. Petitioner, the Sheriff of Palm Beach County, seeks forfeiture of an automobile and $5,000 currency under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. In accordance with Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1983), petitioner published the notice of the forfeiture proceedings prior to filing the petition for a rule to show cause....

...ish each of the respondents with a copy of the rule to show cause. In denying the motion, the trial court stated in its order: To the extent that there may remain any question, however, this Court expressly holds that in forfeiture proceedings under Section 932.704, Florida Statutes, the Court acquires jurisdiction to determine the rights to the property which is the subject of the forfeiture proceeding only as to those persons or entities who have submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of the...

...It is at that time that the forfeiture hearing will take place with respective parties presenting their evidence in accordance with the issues drawn by the pleadings with recognition of their respective burdens of proof. Id. at 803 (Emphasis added). How should adequate notice be given in a forfeiture proceeding? Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981), provides that the seizing agency shall give notice of the forfeiture proceedings by registered mail and shall publish such notice prior to application to the court for the issuance of a rule to show cause....

...1 Hudson refused to sign the notice and failed to request an adversarial preliminary hearing. Thereafter, the City filed its forfeiture complaint and affidavit, and the trial court entered an order finding probable cause based on the City’s documents. See § 932.704(5)(b), Fla....

...However, the substance of the law has remained substantially the same since the 1996 amendments. 2 supporting affidavit to determine whether there was probable cause for the seizure.’” (alteration in original) (quoting § 932.704(5)(b)))....

...At the forfeiture proceeding, the court “shall” order the seized property forfeited to the seizing agency “[u]pon clear and convincing evidence that the contraband article was being used in violation” of the Forfeiture Act. § 932.704(8), Fla. Stat. (2002). 2 The person contesting the forfeiture in the second stage is identified in section 932.704 as a “claimant.” The class of persons who are claimants is narrower than those entitled to notice of the adversarial preliminary hearing....

...are not limited to, physical possession of the property and sources from which the money or other intangible property may have originated, such as employment, business ventures, loans, gifts and the like.” Id. 2 Pursuant to the 2016 amendments to section 932.704(8), the clear and convincing standard was changed to beyond a reasonable doubt. 4  Given that “this is a factual determination to be made by the trial judge, the claimant ought to have the op...

...entered in favor of the City and remand for the trial court to conduct the necessary evidentiary hearing to determine whether Hudson possessed standing as a claimant to the $1,770 in the forfeiture proceeding under sections 932.701(2)(g), 932.701(2)(h), and 932.704....

...Upon the timely request of a person entitled to notice, this determination is made at an adversarial preliminary hearing. § 732.703(2). Otherwise, the court independently reviews the seizing agency’s forfeiture petition and supporting affidavit to make a probable cause determination for the seizure. § 932.704(4)(b)....

...forfeiture stage, in which the seizing agency must prove to the court or jury that the owner of the seized property had actual or constructive knowledge that it was being used in violation of the Forfeiture Act. Gomez, 41 So.3d at 186 . If so, the property is forfeited. § 932.704(8). The specific statute at issue here, section 932.704(9), provides in subsection (a) that “[w]hen the claimant prevails at the conclusion of the forfeiture proceeding, if the seizing agency decides not to appeal, the seized property shall be released immediately to the person entitled...

...ause a litigant should have no concern about the state’s ability to pay the judgment if it loses — and noted that the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act authorizes monetary relief if the property owner is ultimately successful. Id. at 414 (citing § 932.704(9)(b))....

...We hold that claims for loss of value and loss of income were authorized by the plain language of the forfeiture statute when the claimants prevailed on appeal after a finding of no probable cause. We reverse the order denying the motion to determine damages under section 932.704(9)(b), and we remand for further proceedings....

...Florida Highway Patrol Trooper Michael Merritt stopped Calderon for speeding on I-75 in Lee County. Maria Teresa Peralta-Mazza was in the car with Calderon, as was the couple's baby. The trooper seized $7000 that was discovered in the car, and the Department filed a petition for forfeiture. See § 932.704(4), Fla....

...gency proves probable cause for forfeiture by reviewing the agency's verified affidavit, supporting documents, and testimony. § 932.703(2)(c). If probable cause is established, the property is held until a trial on the ultimate issue of forfeiture. § 932.704(3)....

initiated forfeiture proceedings pursuant to section 932.-; 704, Florida Statutes (1983). Green made a timely

...Michael H. Hatfield, of Michael H. Hatfield, P.A., Umatilla, for Appellee. SHARP, W., J. The Sheriff of Lake County, Fred Cobb, appeals from a final order that awarded costs and attorney fees to Langworthy's counsel, together with damages pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (2001), in a forfeiture case....

...We affirm. A judgment was rendered on June 10, 2003, denying forfeiture of Langworthy's truck. The judgment contained no reservation of jurisdiction to award attorney fees. Five months later, Langworthy filed a motion for damages and fees, pursuant to section 932.704....

...The appraisal showed the truck had a value of $21,450 when it was recovered by Langworthy. The depreciated loss during its detention was $11,550. On November 25, 2003, Langworthy filed a motion in the forfeiture case, seeking the statutory remedy of damages, costs and attorney fees, pursuant to section 932.704(9)(b) and (10)....

...rded Langworthy damages. We reject this view. The forfeiture proceeding is an in rem action against the truck. [2] What is involved in this proceeding is a statutory remedy for damages, costs and attorney fees provided for by the forfeiture statute. § 932.704(9)(b) and (10), Fla....

...[4] The Sheriff also argues that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.525 is a bar to Langworthy's award of attorney fees and costs because his motion was filed more than 30 days after the forfeiture judgment was rendered. The Florida Rules of Civil Procedure apply to forfeiture proceedings. See § 932.704(2), Fla. Stat.; Gervais v. City of Melbourne, 890 So.2d 412, 413 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). However, we have found no case in which this rule has been applied to section 932.704 for damages that encompass attorney fees and costs....

...[7] AFFIRMED. PETERSON and MONACO, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] See Wentworth v. Johnson, 845 So.2d 296, 299 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). [2] See Rosado v. Bieluch, 827 So.2d 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Gervais v. City of Melbourne, 890 So.2d 412 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). [3] § 932.704(10), Fla. Stat. (2001). [4] Town of Oakland v. Mercer, 851 So.2d 266 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (Orfinger, J., concurring specially), citing United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property, 510 U.S. 43, 114 S.Ct. 492, 126 L.Ed.2d 490 (1993). [5] § 932.704(1), Fla. Stat. [6] § 932.704(10), Fla....

PER CURIAM. This is an appeal from an order denying Ocean Bank’s motion to set aside a final judgment of forfeiture on the grounds that it was void where the bank had not been served with process pursuant to the Forfeiture Statute, section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1997)....

...The seizing agency shall also publish, in accordance with chapter 50, notice of the forfeiture complaint once each week for 2 consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation, as defined in s. 165.031, in the county where the seizure occurred. (Emphasis added) § 932.704(6)(a), Fla....

...3d DCA 2002). 5 a uniformed narcotics officer advised the owners of real property that their property was being seized pursuant to the state forfeiture act and the owners were thus instructed to execute a quitclaim deed. That forfeiture proceedings pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes, had not and would not be followed was not a matter obviously knowable to the Smiths at that time....

...the trial court failed to obtain from her a written waiver of her right to a jury trial. We affirm. Rule 1.430(d), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, states that “a party who fails to serve a demand as required by this rule waives trial by jury.” Section 932.704(3), Florida Statutes (1995) provides: Any trial on the ultimate issue of forfeiture shall be decided by a jury, unless such right is waived by the claimant through a written waiver or on the record before the court conducting the forfeiture proceeding....

...on of forfeiture proceedings. Manatee County deputies seized a Dat-sun pickup truck registered in the name of James Bryan Kruysman because of its use in the alleged trafficking of a controlled substance. Forfeiture proceedings under sections 932.701-932.704, Florida Statutes (1983), were instituted in the name of the state for the use and benefit of the Manatee County Sheriff’s Department....

...was properly held responsible for his wrongful act. The state was a named party in these proceedings and the suit was prosecuted by the state attorney. That the state had an interest in the outcome of the suit is demonstrated by the last sentence of section 932.704(1) which provides: The final order of forfeiture by the court shall perfect the state’s right and interest in and title to such property and shall relate back to the date of seizure....

from the trust fund are to be expended.14 Section 932.704(3)(a), F.S. (1990 Supp.), however, provides

...Floyd argues that the trial court erred in finding that the amended verified complaint, properly identifying the Firebird as having been used in a robbery of the Citizens Bank in April 2008, related back to the date of the initial complaint for filing deadline purposes. Section 932.704, entitled "Forfeiture proceedings," provides in part: "The seizing agency shall promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred." § 932.704(4)....

...Balkwill, 853 So.2d 371, 374 (Fla.2003), the Florida Supreme Court held: Because the statute here provides for the deprivation of a property right, its procedural requirements cannot be regarded as immaterial or a matter of mere convenience. We hold that the requirement in section 932.704(4) to "promptly proceed" with a forfeiture action is mandatory, and that under section 932.701(2)(c), "promptly proceed" means what it says: "to file the complaint within 45 days after seizure." Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190(a...

...Greenwood: This is in response to your request for an opinion on substantially the following questions: 1. IS MONEY OR CURRENCY, WHICH IS FORFEITED PURSUANT TO THE FLORIDA CONTRABAND FORFEITURE ACT, DEPOSITED DIRECTLY INTO THE SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO s 932.704 (3)(a), F.S.? 2....

...IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY ELECTS TO RETAIN FORFEITED PROPERTY FOR ITS OWN USE, IS THE FUTURE SALE OF THAT PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF THE FLORIDA CONTRABAND FORFEITURE ACT? 3. MAY A SEIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OBTAIN TITLE TO FORFEITED PROPERTY PURSUANT TO s 932.704 (4), F.S. (1982 SUPP.), AND THEREAFTER SELL SUCH PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF CHAPTER 274 , F.S., WITHOUT EVEN HAVING USED THE PROPERTY FOR OPERATIONAL PURPOSES? QUESTION ONE The "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act," ss 932.701 - 932.704 , F.S., as amended by Ch....

...itle to contraband articles or contraband property used in violation of s. 932.702 shall immediately vest in the state upon seizure by a law enforcement agency, subject only to perfection of title, rights, and interests in accordance with this act." Section 932.704 , F.S....

...ction where the seizure or the offense occurred. The circuit court upon due proof issues a final order of forfeiture against the seized property perfecting the state's right and interest in and title to the forfeited property. Subsection (3)(b) of s 932.704 provides the legislative direction for the disposition of forfeited money or currency....

...(e.s.) Thus, the answer to your first question is that when more than one law enforcement agency was substantially involved in effecting the forfeiture, the court having jurisdiction over the forfeiture proceedings in the final order of forfeiture, as provided in s 932.704 (3)(b), F.S....

...law enforcement agency, the court order should direct that the money or currency be paid over to the board of county commissioners for deposit into the special law enforcement trust fund established by the board of county commissioners pursuant to s 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...seizure was effected would appear to fulfill this fiduciary duty; alternatively, deposit in a qualified public depository would also appear to fulfill this duty until such time as a court order directs otherwise. QUESTION TWO Subsection (3)(a) of s 932.704 , F.S....

...rcement agency "may salvage the property or transfer the property to any public or nonprofit organization, provided such property is not subject to a lien preserved by the court as provided in s. 932.703 (3)." In the alternative, subsection (4) of s 932.704 provides that "[u]pon the request of any law enforcement agency which elects to retain titled property after forfeiture, the state shall issue a title certificate for such property to the agency." In AGO 81-99, this office stated that "once the sheriff obtains title to the forfeited property pursuant to s. 932.704 (4), F.S., such property becomes subject to the provisions of ch....

...274." After the head of the law enforcement agency has opted to retain forfeited property, the provisions of the Contraband Forfeiture Act are exhausted 1 and no provision of that act or other law operates to reactivate the distribution formula contained in subsection (3)(a) of s 932.704 , F.S....

...Therefore, it is my opinion, under the present statutes, that after a law enforcement agency has elected to retain forfeited property for that agency's use, the future sale of that property is not subject to the provisions of the Contraband Forfeiture Act. QUESTION THREE Subsection (4) of s 932.704 , F.S....

...In summary, it is therefore my conclusion that, unless and until legislatively amended, money or currency seized and forfeited under the Contraband Forfeiture Act is to be deposited into the special law enforcement trust fund pursuant to a court's final order of distribution in forfeiture proceedings under s 932.704 , F.S....

...yond the authority of this office to decide. Sincerely, Jim Smith, Attorney General Prepared by: Craig Willis, Assistant Attorney General 1 The only exception to this statement is the quarterly reporting requirements contained in subsection (5) of s 932.704 , F.S....

...Contraband forfeiture funds may not be used to hire a consultant to plan jurisdictions for the Safe Neighborhood Advisory Board, since such a position is not located within the city's police department. The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, ss. 932.701 - 932.704 , F.S., authorizes the law enforcement agency effecting a forfeiture of seized property to sell or otherwise salvage or transfer the property to any public or nonprofit organization rather than retaining it for the use of the law enforcement agency....

...then to various costs incurred in connection with the forfeiture proceedings. The remaining proceeds are deposited in a special law enforcement trust fund established by the board of county commissioners or the governing body of the municipality. 2 Section 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...In addition to contraband forfeiture funds being restricted to use for law enforcement purposes as determined by the municipal governing body, the chief of police must make a request that the funds be spent for such purposes and certify that the request complies with s. 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...While achieving these goals by providing recreational activities supervised by volunteer police officers may not be a traditional crime prevention method, reduction or preventing crime is a valid use of contraband forfeiture funds. This office has previously stated that the legislative intent of s. 932.704 , F.S., is that "trust funds should be used only for the expressly specified purposes or for other extraordinary programs and purposes, beyond what is usual, normal, regular or established." 5 "Crime prevention" is one of the expressly stated purposes for which contraband forfeiture funds may be expended....

...Accordingly, it is my opinion that contraband forfeiture funds may be used to create a police athletic league which provides a recreational outlet for disadvantaged youths, if the chief of police requests the expenditure of such funds and certifies that the expenditure complies with s. 932.704 , F.S....

...7 The act recognizes, however, that municipalities or counties may create safe neighborhood improvement districts without planning funds from the trust fund. 8 The act does not provide direction for alternative sources for funding the preparation of the plan. Section 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...ed that the school district's security department did not fall within the law enforcement agencies enumerated in the contraband forfeiture act which may share in the proceeds from a contraband forfeiture proceeding. In light of the plain language of s. 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...While the role of a consultant to the advisory board may serve a purpose to prevent crimes, a position which is located outside the city's police department would not be eligible for contraband forfeiture funds. Sincerely, Robert A. Butterworth Attorney General RAB/tls 1 Section 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...The final order of forfeiture by the court shall perfect in the law enforcement agency right, title, and interest in and to such property, subject only to the rights and interests of bona fide lienholders, and shall relate back to the date of seizure. Fla. Stat. § 932.704(8); see also United States v....

...The final order of forfeiture by the court shall perfect in the law enforcement agency right, title, and interest in and to such property, subject only to the rights and interests of bona fide lienholders, and shall relate back to the date of seizure. Fla. Stat. § 932.704(8); see also United States v....

General (ls) 1 Sections 932.701-932.704, F.S. 2 Section 932.704(3)(a), F.S. 3 See generally, Alsop v. Pierce

...tality in the commission of any felony may be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the act). Following the seizure of the vehicle, the state attorney proceeded against it in circuit court by rule to show cause, as prescribed in section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes....

...to a civil forfeiture action, see Vasquez v. City of Hialeah, 487 So.2d 72 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), and that the standard of proof in criminal cases is far greater than in civil forfeiture actions, where the standard is clear and convincing evidence. See § 932.704(8), Fla....

allegations of the complaint. See § 932.704(5)(a). The verified factual allegations state

PER CURIAM. After dismissal of Appellees’ forfeiture action was affirmed on appeal, State Dep’t of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Metiver, 684 So.2d 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), Appellants sought attorney’s fees pursuant to § 932.704(10), Fla.Stat....

...ney’s fees “if the court finds that the seizing agency has not proceeded at any stage in the proceedings in good faith or that the agency’s action which precipitated the forfeiture proceedings was a gross abuse of the agency’s discretion.” § 932.704(10), Fla.Stat....

date of seizure of the property. Section 932.704(1), F.S. Section 932.704(3)(a), F.S., permits the head

...—, 116 S.Ct. 2135 , 135 L.Ed.2d 549 (1996), the instant criminal prosecution was not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause. We must therefore reverse. After the felony charges were filed, the Sheriff of Orange County filed a complaint pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1995), seeking forfeiture of a 1987 Ford van, allegedly owned by the defendant and involved in the instant criminal charges....

83-75, 83-30, 83-2, 82-97, 81-100, and 81-99. Section 932.704(3) sets forth the legislative direction for

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Judge. The state appeals from a circuit court order dismissing the state’s civil proceedings, sec. 932.704, Fla.Stat....

...urn the goods to the owner Cobb, as necessarily implied by that statute, upon his acquittal or discharge of the offense charged. The state could not then, the court ruled, seek civil forfeiture of the same liquor as contraband for like reasons under section 932.704. Alternatively the court held that the state *66 did not satisfy the requirement of 932.704 that the state “promptly proceed against the contraband article” seized, in that the state seized the liquor by warrant on June 30, 1982, but did not begin civil forfeiture proceedings until January 4, 1983....

...The next day Cobb moved in county court for return of the property seized, and on January 5 the state initiated civil proceedings in circuit court pursuant to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, sections 932.701 et seq. Alcoholic beverages kept for illegal sale are contraband subject to the Act. Sec. 932.701(2)(c). Section 932.704(1) provides in part: The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the contraband article, ......

...We find no other basis for concluding that by prosecuting Cobb the State elected to forego authorized remedies of civil forfeiture. The circuit court’s alternative ground for dismissing these chapter 932 proceedings is that, as appears in the excerpt of section 932.704(1) quoted above, the state attorney is directed to “promptly proceed against the contraband article” after its seizure....

...tion. On November 7, the records of the FAA reflected Worldwide as the owner of the Seneca. The bill of sale indicating transfer to Byrom was not even "clocked in" at the FAA until 2:37 p.m. on November 15. The date of the forfeiture was November 7. Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1987), provides that title is perfected in the sheriff as of the date of seizure since the final judgment relates back to that date....

...property was used as an instrumentality in the commission of a crime. We address Byrom's allegations in the order presented: 1. The date of seizure of the Seneca was November 7, 1988, and the date of the judgment of forfeiture was December 5, 1989. Section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1987), provides in the last sentence of the subsection that "[t]he final order of forfeiture by the court shall perfect in the law enforcement agency right, title, and interest in and to such property and shall relate back to the date of seizure " (emphasis added)....

...It follows that the defenses, if any, and the answer must come from one with standing to assert them. If Byrom had no standing to be heard and if no one else appeared to deny the claim by the sheriff, then the sheriff's allegations were deemed admitted and the judgment of forfeiture perfected the title. § 932.704, Fla....

law enforcement trust fund established by section 932.704, Florida Statutes, to hire a physician's assistant

costs incurred in the forfeiture proceeding. Section 932.704(3)(a), F.S. Any remaining proceeds shall be

...azzara. We reverse. The petition adequately alleges a cause of action to forfeit the money. The affidavit attached to the FDLE’s petition provides “due proof” that the money was being used in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. § 932.704(1), Fla.Stat....

...Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 534 So.2d 729 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988), review denied, 542 So.2d 1333 (Fla.1989); In re Forfeiture of $62,200.00, 531 So.2d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Lobo . We agree that this same standard should apply to determine “due proof” under section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1989)....

...: IS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE FUNDS IN THE SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND AND IN WHAT MANNER MAY SUCH FUNDS BE EXPENDED? Your inquiry presumably concerns a special law enforcement trust fund established pursuant to s 932.704 , F.S. (1982 Supp.), by the board of county commissioners with the proceeds from the sale of forfeited property by the sheriff's office. Section 932.701 - 932.704 , F.S., the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, provides the authority and procedures for the seizure and forfeiture of vessels, motor vehicles, aircraft or other personal property which have been used or are being used in violation of s 932.702 , F.S., to transport, conceal or possess contraband articles....

...act vest immediately in the state upon seizure subject only to perfection of title, rights and interests in accordance with the act; owner and lienholder interests in the seized property are, however, preserved under certain conditions. See also, s 932.704 (2), F.S....

...The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the property has been seized, or such attorney as may be employed by the seizing agency, is required to promptly proceed against such property to have the property forfeited to the use of, or to be sold by, the law enforcement agency making the seizure. Section 932.704 (1), F.S....

...whenever he deems it necessary or expedient, may "sell the property forfeited rather than to retain it for the use of the law enforcement agency . . . [and] dispose of the property at public auction to the highest bidder for cash without appraisal." Section 932.704 (3)(a), F.S. (1982 Supp.). See, s 932.704 (4), providing that upon the sale of such property, the state shall issue a title certificate to the purchaser; if the law enforcement agency elects to keep the titled property, the state shall issue the title certificate to the agency....

...The remaining proceeds after payment of such costs are to be "deposited in a special law enforcement trust fund established by the board of county commissioners or the governing body of the municipality and shall be used for law enforcement purposes only." And see, s 932.704 (3)(b), F.S....

...all be equitably distributed to the board of county commissioners or the governing body of the municipality having budgetary control over the seizing law enforcement agencies for deposit into the law enforcement trust fund established pursuant to [s 932.704 (3)(a)]." The special law enforcement trust fund established by the board of county commissioners pursuant to s 932.704 (3)(a), F.S....

...ecial law enforcement trust fund; furnishing of such medical attention and treatment to county prisoners is a continuing and ongoing or regular duty and function of the sheriff's office which is a normal operating cost of the county jail for which s 932.704 does not countenance the use of the funds from the special law enforcement trust fund. It appears clear from an examination of s 932.704 that it is the board of county commissioners which is accountable for the special law enforcement trust fund; the special trust fund is established by the board which is vested with the exclusive authority to determine for what law enforcement purposes funds from the special trust fund are to be expended....

...1976) (when the statute enumerates the things upon which it is to operate or forbids certain things, it is ordinarily to be construed as excluding from its operation all things not expressly mentioned); Dobbs v. Sea Isle Hotel, 56 So.2d 341 (Fla. 1952). Section 932.704 (5), F.S....

...ers and responsibilities. See generally, s 129.03 , F.S., as amended by Chs. 82-33 and 82-226, Laws of Florida, which sets forth the procedures for the preparation of county budgets. Cf., ss 218.31 (1), 218.32 , and 218.33 , F.S. Subsection (5) of s 932.704 , however, provides that future forfeitures or the proceeds therefrom shall not be considered or anticipated by either the sheriff or the board of county commissioners in adopting and approving a budget for the sheriff's office....

...handled in the same manner as are other budget funds pursuant to Ch. 129 and more specifically the sheriff's budget as provided therein and in s 30.49 , as amended, subject to the limitations and restrictions placed upon the special trust fund by s 932.704 (3)(a) and (5), i.e., that the fund shall be used only for law enforcement purposes and shall not be considered as revenue to meet the normal operating needs of the sheriff's office and that future or anticipated forfeitures or the proceeds t...

...f the sheriff's budget. In conclusion, I am of the opinion, unless and until judicially or legislatively determined otherwise, that the board of county commissioners is accountable for the special law enforcement trust fund established pursuant to s 932.704 , F.S....

...are to be expended. Such special trust fund should generally be handled in the same manner as other budget funds pursuant to Ch. 129 and s 30.49 , F.S., as amended, subject to the limitations and restrictions placed upon the special trust fund by s 932.704 , F.S....

...arcell’s motion to dismiss and motion for attorney’s fees for the same date. However, prior to the hearing, Chief Holder filed a voluntary dismissal with prejudice. Garcell then scheduled a hearing on his motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 932.704(10), Florida Statutes (1995), which provides for an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, up to $1000, if the trial court finds no probable cause for the property seizure....

...He also testified that the Prelude had not been reported to have been stolen. Respondent argued at the hearing that the Prelude had been seized as evidence in a criminal investigation and was therefore not subject to the filing requirements of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1997) requires the seizing agency to “promptly proceed” in its forfeiture of contraband by filing a complaint in the trial court -within the jurisdiction where the seizure or offense occurred....

...identity of the motor vehicle or mobile home cannot be determined, the motor vehicle or mobile home shall constitute contraband and shall be subject to forfeiture by a seizing law enforcement agency, pursuant to applicable provisions of ss. 932.701-932.704_ Assuming the vehicle was contraband, this does not explain respondent’s delay in initially filing its forfeiture complaint....

...investigation. It is well established that forfeiture statutes are to be strictly construed. See Cochran v. Jones, 707 So.2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Because respondent failed to “promptly proceed” in its forfeiture of the vehicle as required by section 932.704, petitioner’s petition for writ of prohibition is granted, the writ is issued, the trial court shall proceed no further except to cause the return of the vehicle to petitioner....

932.7055(4)(a), F.S. (1992 Supp.). 4 Id. 5 Section 932.704(3)(a), F.S. (1991), stated that these funds

...The City urges on appeal that the trial court erred in requiring it to pay any attorney’s fees as part of the Bank’s lien. We affirm. Section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1981), provides “[no] bona fide lienholder’s interest shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss. 932.701 — 932.704” if the lien was duly perfected and if the lienholder did not know (actually or constructively) that the property was being used for an illegal activity. Such was undisputedly the situation in this case. When seized property is sold, a lienholder’s interest must be satisfied by paying it from the proceeds of the sale. § 932.703(3), Fla.Stat. (1981); § 932.704(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981). Counsel for appellant concedes that a purchaser at the sale of a forfeited item would have to pay attorney’s fees to a secured creditor as part of the lien. If the law enforcement agency elects to retain the forfeited item pursuant to section 932.704, we think the same obligation arises to satisfy the lienholder’s interest in full, including attorney’s fees....

...We adopt the reasoning of the court in State v. One 1976 Pontiac Firebird, 168 N.J.Super. 168 , 402 A.2d 254 (N.J.Super.Ct.App.Div.1979). Accordingly, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED. DAUKSCH and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur. . §§ 932.701-932.704, Fla.Stat....

GUNTHER, Judge. We reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions to issue a rule to show cause on the appellant’s petition filed pursuant to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Statute, section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1987)....

...good faith. The express policy of the Act is that “law enforcement agencies ... utilize the ... Act ... to prevent the ... use ... of contraband articles for criminal purposes while protecting the proprietary interests of innocent owners .... ” § 932.704(1), Fla....

of a standalone claim. See, e.g., Fla. Stat. § 932.704 (establishing forfeiture proceedings as a circuit

...license suspended, with two or more prior convictions for driving while license suspended or revoked.” Allen filed her answer to the forfeiture complaint, asserting, among other things, a claim for attorney’s fees pursuant to sections 57.105 and 932.704, Florida Statutes (2002)....

...raction. Before the scheduled hearing on the summary judgment motion, the City dismissed its forfeiture complaint. The jeep was subsequently returned to Allen. Allen filed a motion for determination of entitlement to attorney’s fees under sections 932.704 and 57.105. In its order *225 denying fees, the trial court stated that section 932.704(10) permits a court to award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the claimant if it finds that the seizing agency has not acted in good faith or that the seizing agency’s action was a gross abuse, of discretion....

...that Allen is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under section 57.105(1). Having determined that Allen is entitled to attorney’s fees under section 57.105, we decline to reach the issue as to whether she would also be entitled to fees under section 932.704(10)....

section 57.041, *711Florida Statutes (1991), and section 932.-704(10), Florida Statutes (Supp.1992). The trial

DAUKSCH, Judge. The trial court erred in setting aside the default entered by the clerk and denying appellant’s motion for judgment of default. The appellant brought an action for forfeiture, pursuant to Florida Statutes 932.701-932.704, of $2,000 found in a suspicious package at the Orlando International Airport....

...Appellee, the sender of the package, was given proper notice and was personally served in court with the complaint requiring an answer within twenty days. The complaint and notice of forfeiture proceedings were prepared in compliance with Florida Statute 932.704 and this court’s decision in In Re: Forfeiture of One 1976 Chevrolet Corvette, V1N1Z37L6541240, 442 So.2d 307 (Fla....

act.” s. 932.-703(1), Fla.Stat. (1985). In section 932.-704(1), the verbs “may” and “shall” are juxtaposed

...He does not claim he lacked notification of the dismissal order, and he provides no explanation for his delay in asserting his claimed right *32 to the currency. Because we agree that no basis exists to disturb the trial court’s order, we need not consider whether a settlement was reached that complies with section 932.704(7). As the trial court noted, whatever relief Lewis might have would have to be asserted in a civil suit independent of this case. AFFIRMED. VAN NORTWICK, ROWE, and MAKAR, JJ., concur. . §§ 932.701.706, Fla. Stat. (2007) . See id. § 932.704(7) ("When the claimant and the seizing law enforcement agency agree to settle the forfeiture action prior to the conclusion of the forfeiture proceeding, the settlement agreement shall be reviewed, unless such review is waived by the claim...

property; third, to the payment of court costs. Section 932.704(3)(a), F.S. (1990 Supp.), further provides

...is also unavailing. While the car appears to fall within the definition of “contraband article,” see § 932.701(2)(a)5., Fla. Stat. (2014),1 there is nothing in the attached record suggesting the State has instituted forfeiture proceedings. See § 932.704(4), Fla....

DAVIS, S. JOSEPH, Jr., Associate Judge. This is an appeal from a final order of forfeiture of a motor vehicle under the provision of section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...An affidavit in support of the complaint asserted that appellant Gay, while occupying the described vehicle in Marion County forced one James Dye at gun point to return to Sumter County where he was chained to a tree, beaten and robbed. Notice of forfeiture proceedings pursuant to section 932.704(2), Florida Statutes (1981) was published in the Ocala Star Banner and mailed to appellant Gay, advising that appellee would appear before the trial judge on February 2, 1983, for the purpose of filing a rule to show cause why the veh...

...A hearing was held on February 2, 1983, at which no one appeared or filed responsive pleadings on behalf of the appellant. On February 4, 1983, the trial court entered final order of property forfeiture finding that (1) the vehicle was used in violation of the forfeiture provisions of section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981), and (2) proper notice pursuant to section 932.-704(2), Florida Statutes (1981) was given to appellant and all others claiming an interest in the property and that neither the appellant nor any other claimant...

...appellant did not fail to comply with Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.500(b) in that he was not required to plead or defend by Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, statute, or order of court. In reaching this conclusion, we must examine the procedural requirements of section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981), which heretofore have been unclear, but have now been clarified by recent appellate decisions....

...tatutes. The vehicle was impounded. After receiving a notice of seizure of personal property, the claimant retained attorney Berrio. On April 9, 2009, the City filed a verified complaint for final order of forfeiture pursuant to sections 932.701 and 932.704, Florida Statutes (2007)....

...ant’s motion for summary judgment and ordered the immediate return of the vehicle to the claimant. The City did not return the vehicle, and on September 11, 2009, the claimant filed a motion for damages, attorney’s fees, and costs pursuant to subsection 932.704(10) and section 57.105....

...rio his attorney’s fees and costs. Accordingly, we re *716 verse with directions to the trial court to vacate the order awarding attorney’s fees and costs. Reversed and remanded with directions. . The trial court denied the motion for fees under section 932.704, and Berrio did not appeal that denial....

...Forfeiture of a 1997 Ford Ranger Pickup Truck, 803 So.2d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). If the interested person does not request a hearing, the court will review the complaint for probable cause without a hearing. If it finds probable cause, “the court shall enter an order showing the probable cause finding.” § 932.704(5)(b)....

...gen which was allegedly used to facilitate the sale of contraband (cocaine) in violation of Section 932.702(3), Florida Statutes (1981). 1 The vehicle was seized pursuant to Section 932.703(1), 2 and the state instituted forfeiture proceedings under Section 932.704....

...Mostowicz responded by filing a motion to suppress his statements and evidence obtained during his arrest. Although not entirely clear from the motion, it appears that Mostowicz was arguing that if his arrest was illegal, the Sheriff could not establish grounds for the forfeiture by clear and convincing evidence. See § 932.704(8), Fla. Stat. At the hearing on Mostowicz’s motion to suppress, the Sheriff made an ore tenus motion for entry of judgment of forfeiture....

...Rafael Hudson ["Hudson"], pro se, appeals the trial court's order summarily denying his motion for return of property. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion because the seizing agency failed to file a timely forfeiture complaint in accordance with section 932.704(4), Florida Statutes....

...rty sought by Defendant. 2. Pursuant to Florida law, the Defendant is not entitled to a return of the property. The attached forfeiture complaint simply says: 1. This is an action in forfeiture. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Statute 932.704, as the crimes committed and property seized were in Orange County, Florida....

...as its reason that "[t]he City of Apopka has filed a forfeiture complaint." Hudson contends that the trial court erred by summarily denying his motion for return of property because APD failed to file a timely forfeiture complaint in accordance with section 932.704(4), Florida Statutes. Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (2007), entitled "Forfeiture proceedings" provides in part: "(4) The seizing agency shall promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the s...

...Balkwill, 853 So.2d 371, 374 (Fla.2003), the Florida Supreme Court said: Because the statute here provides for the deprivation of a property right, its procedural requirements cannot be regarded as immaterial or a matter of mere convenience. We hold that the requirement in section 932.704(4) to "promptly proceed" with a forfeiture action is mandatory, and that under section 932.701(2)(c), "promptly proceed" means what it says: "to file the complaint within 45 days after seizure." In light of sections 932.704(4) and 932.701(2)(c), and DeGregorio , APD had to file its forfeiture complaint regarding the $21,430.00 in U.S....

...Chapter 85-316 was enacted after the Fifth District Court of Appeal held unconstitutional that part of section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), which prohibited any action for recovery of seized property subject to forfeiture under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, sections 932.701-932.704....

...May 27, 1985), (on file in state archives). Shortly after the effective date of the amendment, the supreme court rendered its decision in the Lamar appeal, reversing the fifth district and holding that due process was satisfied by the requirement in section 932.704(1) that the state attorney “promptly proceed” against the contraband....

...On these bases we think it apparent the intent of the legislature was to provide sufficient due process safeguards to ensure that the statute would pass constitutional scrutiny. While the supreme court, in addressing these concerns, later held that due process was satisfied by the language in section 932.704(1) that the state “promptly proceed against the contraband,” the legislature went further by setting a specific limit on “reasonably prompt.” *1131 While the statute does not bar the state from filing for forfeiture beyond the...

...We find that the criminal court had jurisdiction to enter the order returning the property. Had the city filed within the time limit set by the legislature, the parties would have had proper notice and the criminal court would not have been misinformed about the filing of the forfeiture petition. See § 932.704(2), Fla.Stat....

...e complaint within forty-five days after seizure. Because the statute ... provides for the deprivation of a property right, its procedural requirements cannot be regarded as immaterial or a matter of mere convenience. We hold that the requirement in section 932.704(4) to “promptly proceed” with a forfeiture action is mandatory, and that under section 932.701(2)(c), “promptly proceed” means what it says: “to file the complaint within 45 days after seizure.” *1025 Floyd, 47 So.3d at 346 (quoting DeGregorio v....

...s felonies. Subsection 316.1935(7) provides that “[a]ny motor vehicle involved in a violation of [section 316.1935] is deemed to be contraband, which may be seized by a law enforcement agency and is subject to forfeiture pursuant to ss. 932.701-932.704,” the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act....

.... . any felony.” § 932.701(2)(a)5., Fla. Stat. (2014). Operating under the authority of subsection 316.1935(7), the Sheriff’s Office filed a forfeiture complaint directed at McCormick’s truck based on a violation of section 316.1935. See § 932.704(4), Fla....

...standing to claim the funds. The trial court denied the motion for relief from judgment, and this appeal follows. II. We conclude that the trial court should have granted relief from judgment. The City filed a verified complaint for forfeiture. See § 932.704(5)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999). The trial court entered an order finding probable cause and directing the claimant to file a responsive pleading within twenty days. See id. § 932.704(5)(c). The forfeiture complaint and order to show cause should have been served as original process under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and the statutes governing service of process. § 932.704(6)(a), Fla....

by the city or its officers. Question One Section 932.704(5), F.S. (1991), provided in part that: Any

....701 , et seq., F.S., NEGOTIATE THE RELEASE OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE TO AN AGENT OF A LIENHOLDER FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE CITY OF COSTS INCURRED BY THE CITY IN THE SEIZURE OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE PRIOR TO THE INSTITUTION OF FORFEITURE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 932.704 ? Your letter basically asks if the head of a municipal law enforcement agency may disregard the requirements and procedures of the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act", ss 932.701 -.704, F.S., and negotiate the release of a "contraband article" as defined in s 932.701 (2)(e) to a lienholder's agent prior to the institution of forfeiture proceedings prescribed by s 932.704 . For the following reasons, your question must be answered in the negative. As stated by our office in AGO 82-97, the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act", ss 932.701 — 932.704 , F.S., details the procedures to be used and authorizes the seizure and forfeiture of vessels, motor vehicles, aircraft and other personal property which has been used or is being used in violation of s 932.702 , F.S. Section 932.704 (1), F.S., requires the appropriate state attorney or seizing law enforcement agency to promptly proceed against the contraband article or motor vehicle by rule to show cause in circuit court for the forfeiture of the contraband article or motor vehicle....

...(e.s.) Furthermore, subsection (3) of s 932.703 , F.S., expressly provides the manner in which a bona fide lienholder's interest can be preserved by the court: No bona fide lienholder's interest shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss. 932.701 — 932.704 if such lienholder establishes that he neither knew nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry that such property was being used or was likely to be used for illegal activity, that such use was without his consent, express or implied, a...

...If it appears to the satisfaction of the court that a lienholder's interest satisfies the above requirements for exemption, such lienholder's interest shall be preserved by the court by ordering the lienholder's interest to be paid from such proceeds of the sale as provided in s. 932.704 (3)(a). (e.s.) See also, s 932.704 (2), F.S., (which details required notice procedures to be followed by the state attorney or the seizing law enforcement agency). The bona fide lienholder's interest which may be preserved by the court as described in s 932.703 (3), F.S., is further treated in s 932.704 (3)(a): Whenever the head of the law enforcement agency effecting the forfeiture deems it necessary or expedient to sell the property forfeited rather than to retain it for the use of the law enforcement agency, or if the property is subject...

...The proceeds of sale shall be applied: first, to payment of the balance due on any lien preserved by the court in the forfeiture proceedings; . . . . (e.s.) Subsection (3)(a) was amended by Ch. 82-239, Laws of Florida, but that amendment is not pertinent to your inquiry. Thus s 932.704 (3)(a), F.S., provides specific procedures regarding the disposition of forfeited property, and as well, the treatment of a bona fide lienholder's interest preserved by a court as provided in s 932.703 (3)....

...head of a municipal law enforcement agency which has seized a motor vehicle pursuant to this act is not authorized by statute to negotiate the release of the vehicle to a lienholder's agent prior to the institution of forfeiture proceedings under s 932.704 . Rather, ss 932.703 (3) and 932.704 (3)(a) expressly provide that a bona fide lienholder's interest shall be preserved by the court if such lienholder establishes to the satisfaction of the court that the specified requirements for exemption have been satisfied and paid from the proceeds of sale provided for by s 932.704 (3)(a)....

...In summary, it is my opinion that the head of a municipal law enforcement agency seizing a motor vehicle pursuant to the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act may not negotiate the release of the vehicle to a lienholder's agent prior to the institution of forfeiture proceedings, since ss 932.703 and 932.704 expressly provide that a bona fide lienholder's interest shall be preserved by the court, if such lienholder establishes to the satisfaction of the court that the prescribed requirements for exemption set forth in s 932.703 have been met, and paid from the proceeds of sale provided for by s 932.704 ....

remand for further proceedings consistent with section 932.704. If the state proves by clear and convincing

Thereafter the state attorney, pursuant to section 932.704(1), filed a petition on behalf of the Naples

... No appeal was prosecuted from this determination, and Ospina’s funds were returned to him nineteen days later. Ospina thereafter moved for an award of damages which was granted in part5 by a successor judge.6 He also moved for an award of attorneys’ fees under both section 932.704(10)7 and section 57.1058, 9 of 5 Ospina sought: a twenty percent (20%) return on the property seized equal to $25,800.00 for lost business; the cost of five round trip tickets from Bogota to Miami and rental car expenses of $3,741.62...

...t negotiations; interest of 0.75% compounded monthly for ten months on $129,000.00 U.S currency ($808), for a total amount of damages of $3,293.95. 6 The motion was ruled upon by Judge Arzola who had taken over the division from Judge Caballero. 7 Section 932.704(10) provides: (10) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, up to a limit of $1,000, to the claimant at the close of the adversarial preliminary hearing if the court makes a finding of no...

...funds. A probable cause determination following a first stage adversarial preliminary hearing does not, however, preclude an attorney’s fee award following a second stage summary judgment or trial determination.10 This is so because a § 932.704(10), Fla....

...3d at 95 (confirming that Florida’s Contraband Forfeiture Act establishes a two stage procedure: the first stage being the seizure stage where 8 probable cause determination during a first stage proceeding is required before a second stage may proceed, and as section 932.704(10) makes clear, attorney’s fees may be awarded when it has been shown that “the seizing agency has not proceeded at any stage of the proceedings in good faith or that the seizing agency’s action which precipitated the forfei...

...successful property owner following a stage two judgment which necessarily was preceded by a stage one finding of probable cause); see also In re Forfeiture of: 1997 Jeep Cherokee, 898 So. 2d 223, 224-25 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (addressing a claim for attorney’s fees under section 932.704(10) following a stage one probable cause determination and an agency dismissal during stage two proceedings). Here, neither the fact that Judge Caballero found probable cause nor the factors on which she relied to reach that...

...nal activity.” In re Forfeiture of One Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($171,900) in U.S. Currency, 711 So. 2d 1269, 1274 n.8 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). On this record a lack of good faith that would support a fee award under section 932.704(10) was demonstrated....

...award under this provision as well.12 We therefore affirm the order on appeal except for the denial of an attorney’s fee award, which we reverse and remand for an award of fees. However, we leave it to the court below to determine whether to award fees under section 932.704 (10) or section 57.105 in light of the statements made herein. 12 See Smith v....

continued use of contraband articles....” See § 932.704(1), Fla. Stat. (2008) (emphasis added). Nothing

HURLEY, DANIEL T.K., Associate Judge. This appeal emanates from a civil forfeiture proceeding under section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1985)....

...l court erred by granting forfeiture. We hold that the claimant had standing and that the proof was inadequate to justify a forfeiture. Consequently, we reverse. The Sheriff of Indian River County initiated a civil forfeiture proceeding, pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1985), to obtain forfeiture of a 1983 Wellcraft Scarab boat....

FRANK, CMef Judge. Paul Eddie Allen has appealed from a final judgment of forfeiture on the ground that the court erred by deciding the ultimate issue of forfeiture, a matter within the province of the jury. We agree and reverse. Section 932.704(3), Florida Statutes (1993), provides as follows: Any trial on the ultimate issue of forfeiture shall be decided by a jury, uMess such right is waived by the claimant through a written waiver on the record before the court conducting the forfeiture proceeding....

...The trial court granted appellee’s motion for summary judgment and ordered the return of the money to appellee. On appeal, appellant contends that the trial court erred in granting a summary judgment in appellee’s favor when there were issues of material fact remaining. We agree. Section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1983), provides for the forfeiture of a contraband article: The state attorney within whose jurisdiction the contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other personal prop *328 erty has been seized b...

...nth Judicial Circuit. The trial court forfeited to the Police Department of the City of Oviedo appellant’s automobile and $1,326.11 in cash. The central issue of this appeal is whether the State failed to follow the requirements of Florida Statute 932.704(1) by not “promptly” proceeding to seek forfeiture of the automobile and cash....

...One 1978 Cadillac Sedan DeVille. We do not consider the time between the seizure (April 16, 1981) and the conclusion of the related criminal proceedings (July 27, 1981) to be a part of the formula for determining “promptness” within the meaning of section 932.704(1), Florida Statutes (1981)....

See subsections (2) and (3) of s. 932.703. Section 932.704, F.S., sets forth the proceedings for forfeiture

LEHAN, Judge. In this forfeiture case, the respondent contends that the sheriff was guilty of laches in not promptly filing his complaint for a rule to show cause as required by section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...civil action. We do not find a provision in the Act which dispenses with the ordinary rules for service of the forfeiture complaint and rule to show cause as specified by Department of Law Enforcement v. Real Property . The City relies on paragraph 932.704(6)(a), which requires publication of "notice of the forfeiture complaint ... in a newspaper of general circulation," and service of "notice of the forfeiture complaint by certified mail" on certain individuals. Id.; see also id. § 932.704(6)(b). In our view the cited language addresses other issues, see id. § 932.704(6)(a), (b), and does not address the method of service of process to be employed in serving the complaint and rule to show *986 cause....

...Lago Grande One Condominium Ass'n, Inc., 559 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Honorat v. Genova, 579 So.2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). But see Austin v. Gaylord, 603 So.2d 66 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Accordingly, we do not reach Hicks' argument under Rule 1.070(i). [3] We note that the language used in subsection 932.704(6) is confusing and could benefit from legislative clarification. (1) Paragraph 932.704(6)(a) refers to "notice of the forfeiture complaint" and implies that a complaint has already been filed. Paragraph 932.704(6)(b) specifies the contents of the notice, contains a cross-reference to paragraph 932.703(2)(a) and (b), and indicates that the notice must "state the name of the court in which the complaint will be filed. " (Emphasis added). (2) The first sentence of paragraph 932.704(6)(a) refers to title holders, owners, and holders of a perfected security interest, while the latter part of the same sentence refers only to service of notice of the forfeiture complaint by certified mail on "each person having such security interest in the property." For present purposes we do not address the interpretation of subsection 932.704(6), other than to hold that subsection 932.704(6) does not control the method of service of the forfeiture complaint and rule to show cause.

initial burden of proof in a forfeiture action. Section 932.704(2), Florida Statutes (1981), provides the only

...Judge. On the basis that a 1982 Mercedes Benz automobile had been used by one Godby as an instrumentality in the violation of laws dealing with contraband, the Sheriff of Orange County seized the vehicle and instituted a forfeiture proceeding under section 932.704, Florida Statutes....

...Rife, 950 So.2d 1288, 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Frey did not request an adversarial preliminary hearing as permitted by the Act. Consequently, the Department petitioned the trial court to issue an order finding probable cause to proceed with the forfeiture proceeding pursuant to section 932.704(5)(b), Florida Statutes (2006)....

Florida. 7 Section 932.704(4), F.S., as amended by s. 4, Ch. 92-54, Laws of Florida. 8 Section 932.704(4), F

...Since the appellants were deprived of their due process rights, we must reverse and remand for a hearing where such rights are afforded them. Upon remand, we remind the trial court that when considering the forfeiture of the $154, before claiming property by forfeiture, the state must file forfeiture proceedings pursuant to section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1989)....

...r the trial court nor a jury determined whether the vehicle should be forfeited. Thereafter, on December 17, 2012, Mr. Underwood filed his "Amended Claimant's Motion for an Award of Costs, Attorney's Fees, & Damages" under sections 932.704(9)(b) and (10) in the pending forfeiture action. Mr. Underwood claimed that under section 932.704(9)(b) he was entitled to damages for the loss of use of and for the loss of value in the vehicle arising from the PCSO's seizure of the vehicle because he had prevailed in the forfeiture proceeding. He also claimed that he was entitled to his attorney's fees and costs under section 932.704(10) because the PCSO's conduct that precipitated the forfeiture action constituted a gross abuse of discretion....

...he PCSO returned it was not the same as the condition of the car when it had been taken. -4-  At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court denied Mr. Underwood's claim for damages under section 932.704(9)(b) because, based on the PCSO's voluntary dismissal of the action, Mr. Underwood did not prevail in the forfeiture action at a trial or on appeal as required under the statute. In denying Mr. Underwood's motion for attorney's fees and costs under section 932.704(10), the trial court observed that it had found at the preliminary adversarial hearing held on March 10, 2011, that the PCSO had probable cause to seek forfeiture of the vehicle....

...Then, after conducting discovery, the PCSO had dismissed the forfeiture action and had returned the vehicle to Mr. Underwood. For these reasons, the trial court concluded that the PCSO had proceeded in good faith and ruled that Mr. Underwood was not entitled to his attorney's fees and costs under section 932.704(10)....

...On June 1, 2015, the trial court entered its written order denying Mr. Underwood's motion. This appeal followed. II. DISCUSSION A. The Standard of Review We review the trial court's interpretation of section 932.704(9)(b) de novo. See In re Forfeiture of: $221,898 in U.S. Currency, 106 So. 3d 47, 49 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). We must determine whether the trial court's factual findings under section 932.704(10) that the PCSO did not abuse its discretion in bringing the action and that it had proceeded in good faith are supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Gay v. Beary, 758 So. 2d 1242, 1244 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). B. The Claim for Damages under Section 932.704(9)(b) Mr. Underwood argues that an award of damages for the PCSO's seizure and improper storage of his vehicle was mandatory under section 932.704(9)(b)....

...asserts that the PCSO's position that he was not entitled to damages because he had not prevailed "at trial or on appeal" as a result of the case having been voluntarily dismissed before trial is contrary to the Fifth District's holding in Cox, 881 So. 2d 641. Section 932.704(9)(b) provides—in pertinent part—that a "trial court shall require the seizing agency to pay to the claimant the reasonable loss of value of the seized property when the claimant prevails at trial or on appeal and the seizing agency retained the seized property during the trial or appellate process." (Emphasis added.) Thus the plain language of section 932.704(9)(b) requires that there must be a trial or an appeal and that the claimant prevail at the trial or on appeal before the claimant is entitled to damages under section 932.704(9)(b). Because no trial or appeal occurred in this case, we agree with the trial court's ruling that Mr. Underwood was not entitled to damages under section 932.704(9)(b). To the extent that the Fifth District's decision in Cox suggests that the statute should be interpreted differently, we disagree with that decision. The pertinent language in Cox is quoted from the Fifth District's earlier decision in Gay, which interpreted section 932.704(10), not section 932.704(9). In Gay, the claimant appealed the trial court's order denying her motion for attorney's fees under section 932.704(10) after the sheriff elected not to proceed to trial and voluntarily dismissed his forfeiture proceeding against her. 758 So. 2d at 1243-44. Before affirming the trial court's decision, the Fifth District addressed the sheriff's argument that fees should not be awarded under section 932.704(10) "because the forfeiture proceeding never reached the trial stage and thus no 'trial' attorney's fees [were] awardable." 758 So. 2d at 1244. The Fifth District pointed out that section 932.704(10) provided: -6-  When the claimant prevails, at the close of the forfeiture proceedings and any appeal, the court shall award reasonable trial...

...proceeded at any stage in the proceedings in good faith or that the agency's action which precipitated the forfeiture proceedings was a gross abuse of the agency's discretion. Id. (emphasis added) (quoting section 932.704(10), Fla. Stat. (1997)). In rejecting the sheriff's argument that a trial was required before fees could be awarded under section 932.704(10), the Fifth District reasoned as follows: [T]he obvious intent of the Legislature ....

...It would be contrary to the remedial intent of the statute to give it the limited reading suggested by the Sheriff. 758 So. 2d at 1244 (emphasis added). The Fifth District similarly rejected the sheriff's argument that the claimant was not the "prevailing party" under section 932.704(10)....

...voluntary dismissal of a forfeiture suit, the claimant may be awarded attorney's fees as a 'prevailing' party." Id. (emphasis added). Ultimately, the Fifth District affirmed the trial court's denial of the claimant's motion for attorney's fees under section 932.704(10) because competent evidence supported the trial court's finding that there was no bad faith and no gross abuse of discretion on the sheriff's part. 758 So. 2d at 1244-45. In Gay, the Fifth District interpreted the plain language of section 932.704(10) as not -7- requiring a forfeiture action to reach the trial stage for a claimant to recover attorney's fees or to be the prevailing party under that subsection. Thus, the decision in Gay did not address the language in section 932.704(9)(b) that requires a "claimant [to] prevail[] at trial or on appeal" before the seizing agency may be required to pay "the reasonable loss of value of the seized property." In Cox, the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) sought forfeiture of Mr....

...repossession was wrongful and to conduct discovery to show that the DHSMV had proceeded in bad faith or had grossly abused its discretion. On appeal, the Fifth District observed that "at least some of Cox's . . . claims . . . appear to be authorized by section 932.704(9)(b), Florida Statutes (2001)," and that "[u]nder the statute, Cox may be considered a 'prevailing party' even though the seizing agency dismissed the action." 881 So. 2d at 646 (citing Gay, 758 So. 2d at -8- 1244). Thus it appears that the district court in Cox applied its prior interpretation of the language in section 932.704(10) to its interpretation of section 932.704(9). In considering Mr....

...Underwood's argument under Cox, we observe that the facts in Cox are distinguishable from the facts in this case. When Mr. Cox appealed the dismissal of his counterclaim he had never been given an opportunity to prove his entitlement to damages and attorney's fees under section 932.704. In the case before us, Mr. Underwood appeals the denial of his claim after he received a full evidentiary hearing. However, to the extent that the Fifth District in Cox interpreted sections 932.704(9)(b) and 932.704(10) as establishing the same requirements for a claimant to prove his or her entitlement to damages and to attorney's fees and costs, we disagree with that interpretation of the statutes. Sections 932.704(9) and 932.704(10) use different language to describe when a claimant may recover damages and when he or she may recover attorney's fees and costs. Section 932.704(9)(b) plainly requires a claimant to "prevail[] at trial or on appeal" to be entitled to the damages enumerated in that subsection. On the other hand, section 932.704(10) requires a claimant to "prevail[] at the close of forfeiture proceedings and any appeal"4 and to establish that "the seizing agency has not proceeded at any stage of the proceedings in good faith or that the seizing agency's ac...

...mean "a hearing or trial in which the court or jury determines whether the subject property shall be forfeited." Thus, it is arguable that the Fifth District wrongly concluded in Gay that a claimant may be considered to be the prevailing party under section 932.704(10) after the sheriff takes a voluntary dismissal in the absence of such a hearing or trial. We need not resolve that issue on this appeal. -9- entitled to damages under section 932.704(9)(b) without "prevail[ing] at trial or on appeal," we disagree with that decision and certify conflict. C. Attorney's Fees and Costs under Section 932.704(10) Mr. Underwood also contends that the trial court erred in failing to award him attorney's fees and costs under section 932.704(10), which provides for fees and costs when "the seizing agency has not proceeded at any stage of the proceedings in good faith or that the seizing agency's action which precipitated the forfeiture proceedings was a gross abuse of...

...Underwood argues, the PCSO failed to act in good faith and to timely dismiss its case until five months after the Detective's resignation. After the hearing on Mr. Underwood's motion, the trial court found that Mr. Underwood had failed to meet his burden to recover fees and costs under section 932.704(10)....

...ime to shut this down and give the man his car back[?"] Our review of the record reflects that the trial court's findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence. Thus we affirm the denial of attorney's fees and costs under section 932.704(10). III. CONCLUSION To summarize, we affirm the trial court's determination that Mr. Underwood was not entitled to recover damages under section 932.704(9)(b) because he did not establish that he prevailed at trial or on appeal. We also affirm the trial court's determination that Mr. Underwood was not entitled to his attorney's fees and costs under section 932.704(10) based upon its findings that the PCSO did not abuse its discretion in initiating the action and that it had proceeded in good faith. Further, to the extent that the Fifth District held in Cox v. Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 881 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), that a claimant may be entitled to damages under section 932.704(9)(b) without "prevail[ing] at trial or on appeal," we disagree with that decision and certify conflict. Under the circumstances of this case, some may question the fairness of the statutory requirements that a claima...

...using an online or Internet auction service. Again, the notice and publication requirements of section 705.103 , Florida Statutes, must be satisfied whether the auction is conducted on the Internet or in person at the "nearest suitable place[.]" 20 Section 932.704 (3)(a), Florida Statutes — the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act" Sections 932.701 - 932.704 , Florida Statutes, the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act," authorize the seizure and forfeiture of any contraband article, 21 vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real property used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act....

...nline or Internet auction service so long as the requirements of the act are met. 25 Sincerely, Charlie Crist Attorney General CC/tgh 1 The statute providing for the disposition of forfeited property discussed in Op. Att'y Gen. Fla. 88-27 (1988) was s. 932.704 (3)(a), Fla....

...03-16 (2003) concluding that Ch. 932 , Fla. Stat., does not restrict the disposal or subsequent use of real property obtained through contraband forfeiture procedures after the real property is no longer needed for the purpose for which it was acquired. 25 And see 932.704 (11)(a), Fla....

...removed, destroyed, covered, or defaced or the real identity of the vessel cannot be determined, the vessel may be seized as contraband property by a law enforcement agency or the division, and shall be subject to forfeiture pursuant to ss. 932.701-932.704 ......

...See In re the Forfeiture of One 31' Sea-hawk “Cigarette” Vessel, hull number, not available, 572 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991.) Further, when section 328.07 is read in pari materia with section 932.-704 it seems clear that the state must present proof of wrongdoing on the part of the owner of the boat. Section 932.704 provides, in relevant part: The state attorney ......

...forfeited to the use of, or to be sold by, the law enforcement agency making the seizure, upon producing due proof that the contraband article ... was being used in violation of the provisions of this act. Further, section 932.703(2) provides: No property shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss. 932.701 — 932.704 if the owner of such property establishes that he neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that such *680 property was being employed or was likely to be employed in a criminal activity....

...This notice does not contain a certificate of service, is not dated, and does not appear to have been filed in the court file. A hearing was conducted on the motion to set aside default; the trial court denied appellant’s motion. We reverse. The applicable statute governing forfeiture proceedings, section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1993), provides: § 932.704 Forfeiture proceedings.— (4) The seizing agency shall promptly proceed against the contraband article by filing a complaint in the circuit court within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred....

Section 932.7055(4)(c)2., Fla. Stat. (1994). 7 Section 932.704(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (1991). 8 And see, Op. Att'y

WALDEN, Judge. This is a forfeiture proceeding under the provisions of Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...say “ * * * by rule to show cause *802 in the circuit court.” See dissent in Famigllietti v. State ex rel. Broward County, Etc., 382 So.2d 767 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). 1 We take notice that a variety of procedures have been evolved with reference to Section 932.704, Florida Statutes, supra, some with and some without the use of a rule to show cause and some with and some without responsive pleadings, and some with other variations....

...n harmony with the principle that the legislature will be presumed to have intended to enact a valid and constitutional law. Smetal Corporation v. West Lake Inv. Co., 126 Fla. 595 , 172 So. 58 (1936). To that end we feel justified here in construing Section 932.704, Florida Statutes (1981) to impliedly contain omitted specifics which due process necessitates....

...Von Wersebe, 365 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The City argues that on the date of the seizure, record title listed James Trombino as owner of the vehicle. Thus the City contends that it properly sent notice of the forfeiture proceedings to the registered owner pursuant to Section 932.704(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1982). We disagree. Section 932.704(2) states that “the seizing agency shall be obligated only to make diligent search and inquiry as to the owner of the subject property .......

...nable care, could have had actual notice. The trial court should have permitted appellant to intervene because the City failed to make a diligent inquiry as to the *1148 owner of the vehicle and failed to furnish appellant with notice as required by Section 932.704(2)....

...from losing party. (1) The party recovering judgment shall recover all his legal costs and charges which shall be included in the judgment; but this section does not apply to executors or administrators in actions when they are not liable for costs. Section 932.704 Florida Statutes (1985), dealing with forfeiture proceedings states: (3)(a) Whenever the head of the law enforcement agency effecting the forfeiture deems it necessary or expedient, to sell the property forfeited rather than to retain...

...curity, and forfeiture of such property; third, to payment of court costs incurred in the forfeiture proceeding. [Emphasis added.] Attempting to read these statutes together or letting the more specific control over the more general, the language in Section 932.704 would appear to be controlling. However, before it could be known whether Section 932.704(3)(a) is applicable in the present situation it would have to be determined whether the forfeited property was sold, as well as whether there were any proceeds remaining to satisfy court costs after satisfaction of any lien preserved by the court or any cost incurred by the seizing agency as delineated in Section 932.704(3)(a). We therefore affirm the order assessing costs, without prejudice to appellant to petition the trial court for a reduction of court costs assessed against him by the amount of any proceeds remaining after satisfaction of prior expenses under Section 932.704(3)(a), if and when the seized property is sold. We also certify the following question as being of great public importance: IS SECTION 932.704(3)(a), FLORIDA STATUTES (1985), INTENDED TO RELIEVE AN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT FROM LIABILITY FOR COURT COSTS ASSESSED UNDER SECTION 57.041 FLORIDA STATUTES (1985), TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE ARE PROCEEDS REMAINING FROM THE SALE OF THE FORFEITED GOODS AFTER SATISFACTION OF EXPENSES RECEIVING PRIORITY UNDER SECTION 932.704(3)(a)? ANSTEAD, J., and KLEIN, HERBERT J., Associate Judge, concur....