Florida: Police Seize Motorcycles Without Trial

[tmgs]

Florida just taking more rights away.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1537.asp

or

http://tinyurl.com/yx42cy

[deputy5211]

I can't imagine it will be too long before there is a constitutional challenge to this practice.

[hoog62]

It's not a right to flee the police when they take exception to someone riding like an asshole. It's a felony. They've been seizing vehicles (cars, trucks, bulldozers....) used in other types of felonies for years.

Your linked article states:

"The most common state police tactic is to accuse a motorcyclist of a felony, initiate the seizure proceeding, then drop the charges. This allows police get to keep the sport bike without the effort of a court battle or the danger of a not guilty verdict. Even an innocent motorcyclist will think twice about fighting an an unjust seizure since the felony charges carry jail time and a permanent black mark on more than just the driving record."

I don't know where that came from because it does not appear in the source article (from the Orlando Sentinel 1/6/07) that he cites. Don't want to lose your bike? Don't run, or lend it to your little brother who will run. Pretty simple really. The Sentinel article say's they've confiscated 344 bikes out of 400,000 registered in Florida. I'll sleep well tonight.

[deputy5211]

It's not a right to flee the police when they take exception to someone riding like an asshole. It's a felony. They've been seizing vehicles (cars, trucks, bulldozers....) used in other types of felonies for years.

Your linked article states:

"The most common state police tactic is to accuse a motorcyclist of a felony, initiate the seizure proceeding, then drop the charges. This allows police get to keep the sport bike without the effort of a court battle or the danger of a not guilty verdict. Even an innocent motorcyclist will think twice about fighting an an unjust seizure since the felony charges carry jail time and a permanent black mark on more than just the driving record."

I don't know where that came from because it does not appear in the source article (from the Orlando Sentinel 1/6/07) that he cites. Don't want to lose your bike? Don't run, or lend it to your little brother who will run. Pretty simple really. The Sentinel article say's they've confiscated 344 bikes out of 400,000 registered in Florida. I'll sleep well tonight.

The linked-to article appears to misinterpret and sensationalize the matter with the statement about police filing a felony charge, seizing the vehicle, and then dropping the charges. I haven't done the research on this one, but my gut is telling me "BS."

I agree with you all the way, but the key point carries the argument a little further. My comment about a constitutional challenge referred to needing more than an accusation to separating someone from their property. It's not enough to merely accuse someone of a felony. There has to be due process on the felony charge, and there has to be due process on the civil forfeiture action. If this is not happening, I would expect a challenge to the law.

[tmgs]

The linked-to article appears to misinterpret and sensationalize the matter with the statement about police filing a felony charge, seizing the vehicle, and then dropping the charges. I haven't done the research on this one, but my gut is telling me "BS."

I agree with you all the way, but the key point carries the argument a little further. My comment about a constitutional challenge referred to needing more than an accusation to separating someone from their property. It's not enough to merely accuse someone of a felony. There has to be due process on the felony charge, and there has to be due process on the civil forfeiture action. If this is not happening, I would expect a challenge to the law.

do the research then call bs

[tmgs]

It's not a right to flee the police when they take exception to someone riding like an asshole. It's a felony. They've been seizing vehicles (cars, trucks, bulldozers....) used in other types of felonies for years.

Your linked article states:

"The most common state police tactic is to accuse a motorcyclist of a felony, initiate the seizure proceeding, then drop the charges. This allows police get to keep the sport bike without the effort of a court battle or the danger of a not guilty verdict. Even an innocent motorcyclist will think twice about fighting an an unjust seizure since the felony charges carry jail time and a permanent black mark on more than just the driving record."

I don't know where that came from because it does not appear in the source article (from the Orlando Sentinel 1/6/07) that he cites. Don't want to lose your bike? Don't run, or lend it to your little brother who will run. Pretty simple really. The Sentinel article say's they've confiscated 344 bikes out of 400,000 registered in Florida. I'll sleep well tonight.


yes it is pretty simple, and in no way do I condone running from the law, the issue here is like in so many other ways they actually seize a vehicle without due process

"The young daredevils who speed away from police on high-performance motorcycles face a growing risk across Florida: losing their wheels.

All it takes is letting a cop get close enough to their fast-moving bikes to see the license plate"

another quote
"In 2005, Schweinsberg bagged a Yamaha R6 when its rider, Shawn Connor, fled after "popping a wheelie" at 80 mph on Interstate 4. Connor, then 23, and a buddy on another bike sped away onto Florida's Turnpike without stopping to pay their tolls, arrest records show.

Thinking they got away, the two stopped to refuel at the Turkey Creek service plaza. That's where the other rider escaped on a bike without a tag when Schweinsberg busted Connor and took his motorcycle.

"He looked surprised," the trooper said."

Note where it said the trooper took his motorcycle it appears that meant on the spot.


or how about this
"FHP seized Williams' motorcycle in 2005 when a trooper stopped his younger brother for riding with a bent tag. The stop led to an arrest on felony charges that later were dropped -- but FHP kept the bike."

hmm charges were dropped but FHP kept the bike, how is that NOT illegal?

IMHO had they had reason to keep the bike than the perp should have been charged and convicted, this did nothing but GIVE the FHP a motorcycle that will moire than likely cost more to store than they could get from auction with it


I know of one case where a vehicle was sold at auction before the case ever went to court, now that should be illegal.

[deputy5211]

I agree, and I would not call BS without doing the research. FWIW, I am not inclined to do the research on this one, it was more of a casual conversation for me. If you have done the research and can provide the cites, feel free to share.

For the record, I did not call BS. I said up front that I did no research on this, and that it was only a gut feel that it was BS. BIG difference.

[tmgs]

For the record, I did not call BS. I said up front that I did no research on this, and that it was only a gut feel that it was BS. BIG difference.


my mistake, I think this is worth taking a better look into.

""All the law says is we get the tag number, we just come and pick up the bike," Florida Highway Patrol spokesman Kim Miller told the Orlando Sentinel newspaper."


leaves it pretty wide open, now we are depending on every officers honesty and not getting irritated.

Having been accused of running from the law before myself when it was not true, this hits home.

I can see it now, hitting 80 passing through Orlando area turnpike cop decides he is going to give me a ticket for speeding. Me on the bike getting through traffic he gets hung up behind a semi but had a chance to get my tag, I never know he is back there, he just says screw it that guy ran, comes to my house takes my $20k BMW.

If in fact this is true, this is bad for all of us.

(particularly with the cop that his ol lady ran off with a motorcyclist - <big grin>)

Granted the chances are small that a scenario like that would happen, but they could and do.

It could be me you or anyone just not seeing the LEO lights on behind you and that could be all it takes to loose your bike.

Tom

[grifscoots]

I can see it now, hitting 80 passing through Orlando area turnpike cop decides he is going to give me a ticket for speeding. Me on the bike getting through traffic he gets hung up behind a semi but had a chance to get my tag, I never know he is back there, he just says screw it that guy ran, comes to my house takes my $20k BMW.

If in fact this is true, this is bad for all of us.

Tom

For the sake of argument: If your bike is locked in your garage, how can the law come in and take it without a warrant? If there is a warrant, the charges would have to be specific and provable beyond a hint of probable. Is the LEO cam on a cop car admissable for the short period the bike is seen in this case?

[tmgs]

For the sake of argument: If your bike is locked in your garage, how can the law come in and take it without a warrant? If there is a warrant, the charges would have to be specific and provable beyond a hint of probable. Is the LEO cam on a cop car admissable for the short period the bike is seen in this case?

it does not say if they are using a warrant or not, if this is true there is a real problem here destroying our Constitution

parts of FL have some very easy seizure methods, like when they took that car I mentioned, they took it on the spot sold it at auction before the case ever saw court.

Hey ya know what is funny, my spell checker tries to turn grifscoots to grassroots kind of ironic with the single issue politics at hand
<grin>

I have some things I must take care of but I sent this to a freind that seems to be pretty heavy into fl politics regarding motorcycle laws, if I do not hear back from him, I will dig into this more myself to try and get clearer answers


Tom

[astuber]

I don't see this as being much different than what has been going on in Louisiana along the I-10 corridor for a long time.

There the police stop people for speeding and perform a drug search. If they find any cash over a few dollars, they seize the money as being drug related and it is up to the individual to prove otherwise. I'm sure that they do in fact catch some drug money doing this but they also keep a lot of money because it is simply too expensive to reclaim it.

According to Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence, one of the "repeated injuries and usurpations" committed against the American people by the King of England was the erecting of "a multitude of New Offices, and . . . swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance."

[ldrider]

and you should know that by now.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/27/191414.shtml

[kmurphy165]

For the sake of argument: If your bike is locked in your garage, how can the law come in and take it without a warrant? If there is a warrant, the charges would have to be specific and provable beyond a hint of probable. Is the LEO cam on a cop car admissable for the short period the bike is seen in this case?

Hi, Grifs. I've been lurking as Life is a Bitch and I'm waiting to die and it hasn't seemed worth the effort to contribute more signal noise on the list, but your comment really struck a chord in me. My response is very simple, ever hear of a tame judge? Considering the number of erroneous, false and invalid warrants issued in this country for search and seizure it seems to me that each jurisdiction prosecutor's office has a list of "tame" judges the office can go to for an easily obtainable warrant. Surely, the process is more complicated than just that, but size and boredom limits restrict what I can delineate here. However,the concept of ease of search warrant obtainability remains.

Karl

[deputy5211]

I can see it now, hitting 80 passing through Orlando area turnpike cop decides he is going to give me a ticket for speeding. Me on the bike getting through traffic he gets hung up behind a semi but had a chance to get my tag, I never know he is back there, he just says screw it that guy ran, comes to my house takes my $20k BMW.

If in fact this is true, this is bad for all of us.

(particularly with the cop that his ol lady ran off with a motorcyclist - <big grin>)

Granted the chances are small that a scenario like that would happen, but they could and do.

It could be me you or anyone just not seeing the LEO lights on behind you and that could be all it takes to loose your bike.

Tom

You are correct, I have been there myself. Headed up to Sturgis a few years ago, Chief and I were pulled over by Kansas HP (and yes, the Harleys were in the trailer :p). He was all PO'ed and grunted that he was "chasing" us for over five miles and wanted to know why we were evading. . .

After we explained that we were hardly evading -- that there was moderate traffic moving at only about 40, in the rain, in a construction zone, and pointed out that he only had one forward-facing light, mounted above his rear-view mirror. . . he conceded. It could have been worse.

At the end of the day, it really comes down to the individual officer. If he (or she) lacks ethics, it is foreseeable that there may be abuse, especially if you ran off with the officer's SO! :histerica

[deputy5211]

[ . . .] hasn't seemed worth the effort to contribute more signal noise on the list [. . .]

[. . .] but size and boredom limits restrict what I can delineate here. [. . .]

Ouch! That hurt. :sleep:

[hoog62]

Hi, Grifs. I've been lurking as Life is a Bitch and I'm waiting to die and it hasn't seemed worth the effort to contribute more signal noise on the list, but your comment really struck a chord in me. My response is very simple, ever hear of a tame judge? Considering the number of erroneous, false and invalid warrants issued in this country for search and seizure it seems to me that each jurisdiction prosecutor's office has a list of "tame" judges the office can go to for an easily obtainable warrant. Surely, the process is more complicated than just that, but size and boredom limits restrict what I can delineate here. However,the concept of ease of search warrant obtainability remains.

Karl



I sure miss the old Karl......

[BillyOmaha]

Y'all keep referring to a justification for the seizure of the bike as being "running" from the law. While "running" is a felony and is the most likely/logical application of the law, it is certainly not the only charge that could be used.

Any felony will suffice. Perhaps Reckless Driving, defined by code in a lot of jurisdictions as more than 20 mph over the limit.

Clearly, this law and it's application is to "intimidate" young motorcycle riders by "abusing" their constitutional rights because they are the least sympathetic if they were to complain.

I have been riding in a group of three and we were only 5 mph over the limit. I saw a local LEO come up on me and hit the lights. I couldn't pull over immediately because we on a levee I slowed looking for space to stop. The other two in my group slowly pulled away, went around the next bend and were, effectively, gone.

When I spoke with the LEO he was pretty "hot". We spoke and he calmed down, gave me a warning about the few miles over (I really think he was looking for young intoxicated riders). He then said that I should "chew them other two a new asshole for running". I told him, I know they didn't run and was positive that they just hadn't seen him.

Sure enough, I met up with the other two and they simply hadn't seen the cop.

If he had gotten their plate numbers and it was in Florida, then the police could have taken the bikes. Seems a gross abuse of power. One that younger, less affluent, less mature individuals would have a difficult time fighting.

.

[zippy_gg]

and you should know that by now.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/27/191414.shtml
Funny how travelers in Mexico complain about a corrupt government and unscrupulous police officers... Alas it seems to be happening in the US too!!!:eek:

[GBarnes]

I haven't done the research on this one, but my gut is telling me "BS."

Here's a link to a related article:


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/27/191414.shtml

Seems pretty scary to me.

George

[UncleRock]

So you take someone's plate that you can't stand, then go do 100mph wheelies in front of the cops.
Report your own plate as stolen and ride without one.
Rock

[motorman587]

Just do not believe everything you read. I can even get the kids who hit my truck with a pellet gun charged and I am LEO. Happened in another county.

[Tat_n_Telle]

So you take someone's plate that you can't stand, then go do 100mph wheelies in front of the cops.
Report your own plate as stolen and ride without one.
Rock

Might as well really confuse 'em. Pick up a cheapo 250cc Honda Rebel (or equivalent), register it, stick the plate on your new crotch rocket, go piss off a cop by outrunning him, then stick the crotch rocket in a corner of the garage, and put the plate back on the Rebel, parked outside. If they are going to confiscate the bike that the plate is registered and attached to, it should be fun for them to explain to the judge how some guy evaded them on a 250cc bike!

[ben1364]

I can't comment on the specifics but do support efforts to get motorcyclists that (1) perform unsafe acts, and (2) give the rest of us a bad name, off the road. However, it must be done within the letter and spirit of the law.

[UncleRock]

Might as well really confuse 'em. Pick up a cheapo 250cc Honda Rebel (or equivalent), register it, stick the plate on your new crotch rocket, go piss off a cop by outrunning him, then stick the crotch rocket in a corner of the garage, and put the plate back on the Rebel, parked outside. If they are going to confiscate the bike that the plate is registered and attached to, it should be fun for them to explain to the judge how some guy evaded them on a 250cc bike!
Thats great :histerica
I wonder if they realize that this could get real ugly in a hurry, how long does it take to get unstraped and out of a cruiser? Because there is a couple wars going on, hand gernades are going for about $20. every Jarhead knows a 5 second fuse always goes off in 3. :eek:

Realisticly if I',m doing something that I don't want grabbed by the cops for, its gonna be a lot worse that a stupid wheelie.
Then we have the party with the Tech 9 and the teflon hollow points. Might as well play for keeps. :D
Rock

[kmurphy165]

I sure miss the old Karl......

Yeah, so do I, so do I.

Karl

[Ruben]

I suspect that there is more going on with these stories than we know.

A year or so ago, I was taking an early Sunday morning break, after having had a great ride, and while waiting for the local Southern Cruiser group to show up. While there, a couple of LEO's pulled up in a FL-HP cruiser, also to take a break.

Engaging them one of them in conversation, he appeared to be pretty frustrated. He had already stopped, and ticketed, TWO cars doing in excess of 100 MPH on I-75, one of which was doing 115 MPH. I asked him what penalty someone caught speeding like that was in for, and he said it was ONLY a big fine, and that he doubted that the driver would even care. Considering his frustration about the high speeds involved, and his inability to stop it, I'm surprised that he didn't charge the drivers with reckless driving, and seize the cars if he had that option.

That conversation leads me to believe that it might take a bit more than just normal speeding to result in such drastic action as indicated by this thread. Of course, the public relations officers can "threaten" drastic action, which "may" have the intended effect of moderating hooligan behavior, and may also assure the voting public that "something" is being done about "those wild kids on those dangerous machines" (read as, I don't ride one, so they must be awful). The first time they made the mistake of taking the assets of some really rich "kid", or some powerful politico's kid, they might wind up with a real fight on their hands.

I could be wrong, but I believe that this is more "chest beating" talk, than any real threat to the public at large, including most motorcyclists. Don't forget, many LEO's ride too! No, I'm not a LEO, but I've know several, and the ones that I've met are just hard working people, trying to do a tough job.

[hoog62]

That conversation leads me to believe that it might take a bit more than just normal speeding to result in such drastic action as indicated by this thread.

The difference is, they stopped. The bikes got snatched for running.

[johnrehder]

Thanks George for the link. Another example of our runaway government. Stop the madness............


Here's a link to a related article:


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/27/191414.shtml

Seems pretty scary to me.

George

[BillyOmaha]

I can't comment on the specifics but do support efforts to get motorcyclists that (1) perform unsafe acts, and (2) give the rest of us a bad name, off the road. However, it must be done within the letter and spirit of the law.Howdy Ben,

I empathize with your position, however have a concern. There seems to be a push now-a-day to make penalties ridiculously harsh in order to deter a behavior. When the behavior is truly harmful to others, harsh penalties make sense, but when the penalty is disproportional to the harm it causes then it isn't just.

The articles linked to in the posts above state clearly that the behavior being addressed has caused no injuries to anyone other than the riders themselves. In short, it's not like their driving an 18 wheeler at 100 mph in traffic and flattening cars in their path.

A yahoo riding a motorcycle like a lunatic doesn't (shouldn't) give me a "bad name" anymore than O.J. Simpson's escapade in a Ford Bronco should taint drivers of that vehicle. Although Ford did drop the moniker soon after for some reason ;)

Lot's of terrible results have been reached by the application of laws, even when applied within the letter and spirit of their intent. Take the internment of Americans of Japanese decent by the U.S. government in WWII....or, the confiscation of property owned by German's of Jewish decent during the Nazi rule as examples. There were laws in effect to allow the actions, but still obvious examples of abuse of minority populations nonetheless.

Lest we think that the ridiculous application of these penalties along with the "mind set" that allow for it are relegated to history, look at the public schools approach to "drugs in the school". Here in California the public doesn't want illegal drugs in school and so we support efforts to that effect. So what the school administrators do? In order to make it easy on themselves, they make it a violation to have ANY drug at school. A kid with his asthma inhaler, even an aspirin, will be expelled for having a "drug" on campus. Absolutely ludicrous application of administrative law in order to achieve an objective that we would generally agree with.

.

[grifscoots]

Lot's of terrible results have been reached by the application of laws, even when applied within the letter and spirit of their intent. Take the internment of Americans of Japanese decent by the U.S. government in WWII....or, the confiscation of property owned by German's of Jewish decent during the Nazi rule as examples. There were laws in effect to allow the actions, but still obvious examples of abuse of minority populations nonetheless.


And when they come for our gun's, then the fun begins.

[fas]

And when they come for our gun's, then the fun begins.

They come for my guns a few of them will die/bleed while I run thru all the ammo I can first...................

[grifscoots]

They come for my guns a few of them will die/bleed while I run thru all the ammo I can first...................


.........and that is where the fun begins.

[motorman587]

I know, lets drop the speed limit???? No speed limit on the interstate.

[RSnyder]

I may have missed it reading through the thread but I think we are talking about two different action here though they are both related.
1. M/C rider/driver committing a Felony Criminal act
2. Civil Seizure of the M/C

I am not an attorney and my memory may serve me wrong but here goes, I have seen where persons have been arrested for a Felony Crime and items thought to be fruits of or used inn that Felony Crime were seized under Civil Law. And if you remember you do not have to be found guilty of the Criminal act to be held responsible for the [U]Civil/U] act.

Again I am depending on my memory and may be wrong but since we are not dealing with a Criminal act regarding the seizure of the M/C a Criminal Search Warrant is not necessary to pickup the bike all that is needed is a Civil Seizure Order issued by a judge. Are there any Legal Beagles out there with better information.

[jayjacobson]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/art...27/191414.shtml

Funny how travelers in Mexico complain about a corrupt government and unscrupulous police officers... Alas it seems to be happening in the US too!!!:eek:

We started out talking about the seizure of M/C's in Florida and have swerved into the out-of-control seizure laws due to our ridiculous drug war.

While I might question the sanity of someone who is carrying very large amounts of cash with them, I would never question the legality of it.

I can't begin to tell you how many times I've come across someone carrying a large amount of money on their person.

Shame on anyone using our constitution to wipe their ass with!

[midwilshire]

The law about which you speak is the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act and is found at Fla. Stat. 732.701 - 706. Scroll down to those sections here (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0932/titl0932.htm&StatuteYear=2006&Title=%2D%3E2006%2D%3EChapter%20932).

Really, this law doesn't look so bad.

It basically says that if the police have a reasonable belief that the property was used in the commission of a felony, they can immediately seize that property. They then have to go to court to determine whether or not the property can be forfeited permanently.

There are two hearings at which an owner can contest this business: (i) preliminary hearing, and (ii) permanent forfeiture hearing.

Preliminary Within 5 days of the seizure, the police have to give notice to the owner that the owner can request a preliminary hearing. If one is held, the police must show that probable cause exists to forfeit the property. This basically means they have to show that they've got a good chance at winning the permanent forfeiture hearing. If so, the property is held and a permanent hearing is scheduled. Otherwise, the property is returned.

Permanent At the permanent forfeiture hearing, the police bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the owner knew or should have known that his property would be used in the commission of a felony, and it was so used. If they succeed, the vehicle becomes their permanent property. If the owner wins, the property is given back, along with a wad of cash to compensate for lost use and lost earnings attributable to the seizure along with nominal attorney's fees.

Courts have repeatedly held that these sorts of post-seizure hearings comply with due process. A noteworthy exception is real estate, the seizure of which generally requires a hearing beforehand (because filing the necessary paperwork in the Recorder's Office clouds the title).

All the hallmarks of procedural due process are present: notice, opportunity to be heard, impartial decision-maker (here, a jury), access to evidence, etc.

Since the police risk effectively renting the vehicles from the owners during the hearings if the seizure was wrong, I don't think they'd be quick to abuse the law. Does Officer Jones want to be known as that guy who wrongfully seized three motorcycles and cost the department $500/day for four months?

As with any area of the law, though, those who sleep on their rights lose their rights.

[jayjacobson]

Not Unconstitutional

Great, detailed explanation with "footnotes!"

[deputy5211]

It basically says that if the police have a reasonable belief that the property was used in the commission of a felony, they can immediately seize that property. They then have to go to court to determine whether or not the property can be forfeited permanently.

There are two hearings at which an owner can contest this business: (i) preliminary hearing, and (ii) permanent forfeiture hearing. [ . . .]

All the hallmarks of procedural due process are present: notice, opportunity to be heard, impartial decision-maker (here, a jury), access to evidence, etc.

Since the police risk effectively renting the vehicles from the owners during the hearings if the seizure was wrong, I don't think they'd be quick to abuse the law. Does Officer Jones want to be known as that guy who wrongfully seized three motorcycles and cost the department $500/day for four months?

As with any area of the law, though, those who sleep on their rights lose their rights.

Great analysis and report. Thank you for doing the legwork on this.

[motorman587]

Great analysis and report. Thank you for doing the legwork on this.

Ya, really good work. Question?? I went to those statues and it deals with drugs?? Or did I miss a point.

[jayjacobson]

Hi, Grifs. I've been lurking, as life is a bitch and I'm waiting to die.....

WOW! Well I feel better anyhoo......

[jayjacobson]

I know, lets drop the speed limit???? No speed limit on the interstate.

Oh my!....

[midwilshire]

Question?? I went to those statues and it deals with drugs?? Or did I miss a point.You are correct. The news story at the front of the thread deals with the seizure of motorcycles, but many parts of the law deal with seizure of drugs. There are two quick explanations:

FIRST

In the forfeiture provision - 932.703 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0932/SEC703.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0932->Section%20703#0932.703) - the Florida legislature says that the thing to be seized is any "contraband article."

So, we return to the definitions section - 932.701 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0932/SEC701.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0932->Section%20701#0932.701) - to see how the legislature defines the term "contraband article." It turns out that the definition is fairly broad, including things like drugs (§ 1), vehicles or other personal property used in the commission of a felony (§ 5), and vehicles used while DUI (§ 9), among others.

So, both (i) drugs and (ii) vehicles used to commit felonies are lumped together in the definition of a "contraband article" subject to seizure.

SECOND

The same forfeiture provision - 932.703 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0932/SEC703.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0932->Section%20703#0932.703) - calls for not only the seizure of a "contraband article," but of anything used in violation of the Forfeiture Act.

So, we look to the section of the Act - 932.702 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0932/SEC702.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0932->Section%20702#0932.702) - that says what the Act prohibits (i.e., what could be a violation). There, the Act prohibits things like using a vehicle to transport or conceal drugs or other contraband articles (§ 3) and buying a vehicle with the proceeds of selling drugs or other contraband articles (§ 5), among others.

So even if a vehicle is not used to commit a felony, that vehicle is still subject to seizure if purchased with drug money or used to hide or carry drugs.

--------------------------------------------------
[Motorman, I note that you are a LEO in Florida, so I need to say that this thread is for background info only and that you should rely exclusively on the policies of your department for the interpretation and enforcement of this law.]

[motorman587]

No you are correct, I would not do anything outside our policies, been there too long to screw it up. What I would do and I think I say it already in a post would be to impound the vehicle and then if the department want to keep it, it would be handed over to the legal department. I know we have a motorcycle at our fleet taken from a drug raid. I know it ours because each department want their hands on it. Traffic wants for a demo and others want to sale and use the money for equipment etc............

I like how you lawyers read that laws and it is interesting to see how the others read and understand it. Example is traffic laws. One person believe it is this, you can ask another person and to them it means this totally different. Example in Florida Statue 316.610, improper equipment, I stop and ticket motorcycle riders who have removed their tail section of the motorcycle to hide the license plate in the wheel well, mount it on the side, side ways. Some officer feel that as long as you can read it, it is ok, others believe that you can not change the motorcycle, ie remove the rear fender, mirrors, turn signals etc........... Some do it for show others so they do not get caught. No one has yet taken me to court, so You made some very understanding points and thank you for the time and educating me.

John

[kmurphy165]

[QUOTE=jayjacobson
WOW! Well I feel better anyhoo......[/QUOTE]
Hi, Jay.

There is an old optimistic comment on life that's I've paraphrased in my original post you've captioned, Life Is A Bitch And Then You Die. You've never heard of it before?

What interests me most is there's not been a comment about tame judges issuing search warrants on demand/request. That's the significant portion of the post.

Karl

[grifscoots]

Hi, Jay.

There is an old optimistic comment on life that's I've paraphrased in my original post you've captioned, Life Is A Bitch And Then You Die. You've never heard of it before?

What interests me most is there's not been a comment about tame judges issuing search warrants on demand/request. That's the significant portion of the post.

Karl

Becauthe they're the tame ath all the otherth?

[deputy5211]

Becauthe they're the tame ath all the otherth?

Yeth, thaths twue. Thufferin' thuccotash! :D

[jayjacobson]

Hi, Jay.

There is an old optimistic comment on life that's I've paraphrased in my original post you've captioned, Life Is A Bitch And Then You Die. You've never heard of it before?

What interests me most is there's not been a comment about tame judges issuing search warrants on demand/request. That's the significant portion of the post.

Karl
Well, I didn't even want to address judges issuing warrants on weak PC/affidavits, because it might go on for a 100 pages!

Long, long ago, in a galaxy, far, far away, a man much smarter than I said: life is a bitch, then you marry one, then you give her half and then you die!

Anyhoo, all this optimistic talk of death and destruction has really perked me up! Feel like an ICE COLD Guinness!

[jayjacobson]

Becauthe they're the tame ath all the otherth?

It would appear that Grif has already had a few of those ice cold Guinness's!

[tmgs]

I may have missed it reading through the thread but I think we are talking about two different action here though they are both related.
1. M/C rider/driver committing a Felony Criminal act
2. Civil Seizure of the M/C

I am not an attorney and my memory may serve me wrong but here goes, I have seen where persons have been arrested for a Felony Crime and items thought to be fruits of or used inn that Felony Crime were seized under Civil Law. And if you remember you do not have to be found guilty of the Criminal act to be held responsible for the [U]Civil/U] act.

Again I am depending on my memory and may be wrong but since we are not dealing with a Criminal act regarding the seizure of the M/C a Criminal Search Warrant is not necessary to pickup the bike all that is needed is a Civil Seizure Order issued by a judge. Are there any Legal Beagles out there with better information.



I think you actually hit on something here, but still these seizures are not ordered by a judge at least so far no one has found where it was ordered by a judge

but might be correct about it being a civil seizure not a criminal one

this was posted elsewhere which is old news, I did a quick search on the US vs one Mercedes Benz and found nothing

but anyhow here is the article

http://tinyurl.com/y4mquy

[eljeffe]

At least Texas waits for the trial to complete before they take them.

http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/khou070130_tnt_motorcycles.357e705f.html

[jayjacobson]

At least Texas waits for the trial to complete before they take them.
Police had originally tried to stop the pair, ages 44 and 20, because patrol officers had noticed the racing bikes were not street-legal and lacked registration stickers.

This is very common among the hard core crotch rocket boys. They won't run plates/tags because they have no intention of stopping. BUT, what officers should remember is that every rider parks his machine somewhere. And someone always knows where that is!