Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...CONSTRUING THE PROCESS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN THE ACT The process provided in the Act [6] enables the state to seize property — whether real or personal — "which has been or is being used" to commit one of the enumerated offenses, or "in, upon or by means of which" any enumerated violation "has taken or is taking place." § 932.703(1), Fla....

..."upon producing due proof" that the property was being used in violation of the Act. Id. § 932.704(1). If the state does not initiate proceedings within ninety days after the seizure, the claimant may maintain an action to recover the property. Id. § 932.703(1)....

...h and inquiry by the seizing agency. Id. § 932.704(2). If the property cannot be easily ascertained or reached, the court shall order the forfeiture of any other property of the "defendant" up to the value of any property subject to forfeiture. Id. § 932.703(1) [8] Owners may raise a defense only after the property has been seized, and they must bear the burden in forfeiture proceedings of proving that they neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being used or was likely to be used to commit an enumerated crime. Id. § 932.703(2)....

...Lienholders who can establish their perfected interests also may raise a defense only after seizure, and they bear the same burden as property owners plus an additional burden of proving that they did not consent to having the property used to commit a crime. Id. § 932.703(3)....

...hase, sale, barter, exchange, or giving away of any contraband article. (4) To conceal or possess any contraband article. (5) To acquire real or personal property by the use of proceeds obtained in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. 932.703....

...In lieu of the sale of the property, the head of the law enforcement agency, whenever he deems it necessary or expedient, 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)....

...[7] rights and interest in and title 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. § 932.703(1), Fla....

...The suitcase yielded $489,880 in currency, mostly in $20 bills secured in bundles. Velez told the officer that the money did not belong to him but had been given to him by a person he did not know. Fifteen days after the seizure, Velez requested an adversarial preliminary hearing under section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2002)....

...Velez's counsel asserted that because the officer's sworn complaint reflected that the money was in Velez's possession at the time of the seizure, he was a "person entitled to notice" under section 932.701(2)(e) and therefore had standing to contest the seizure at an adversarial preliminary hearing under section 932.703(2)(a)....

...The Forfeiture Act provides that when personal property is seized, any "person entitled to notice" should receive notice of the right to a preliminary hearing within five days after the seizure and may make a request within fifteen days after receiving notice that the hearing be held. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...(emphasis added). It then provides that a "person entitled to notice" must be notified that there is a right to an adversarial preliminary hearing to determine whether probable cause exists for the seizure and is authorized to request such a hearing. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...ure Act. (Emphasis added.) [7] Further, the amendments made it unlawful to acquire real property by the use of proceeds obtained in violation of the Forfeiture Act, § 932.702, Fla. Stat. (1989), and any such real property was subject to forfeiture. § 932.703, Fla.Stat....

...e claimant to rebut the probable cause showing or, by a preponderance of the evidence, to establish that the forfeiture statute was not violated or that there is an affirmative defense which entitles the claimant to repossession of the item. [6] See section 932.703(2)-(3), Florida Statutes (1981); see also United States v....

...One 1976 Mercedes Benz 2808, 618 F.2d 453 (7th Cir.1980). [6] Once a petition for rule to show cause has been filed and issued, the claimant has an opportunity to recover possession of the seized article by means of the forfeiture proceeding and it becomes his exclusive mode of recovery. § 932.703, Fla....

...activity. Pinecrest also noted that Gomez leased the property to someone she had never met and took no steps to verify his identity or confirm that the driver's license she was shown for him was legitimate. Gomez argued in response that pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2008), a preliminary order of seizure can be granted only upon a showing by the seizing authority that the property owner knew, or should have known after reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or likely to be employed in criminal activity. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court determined that probable cause existed under section 932.703(2)(a) for the seizure of the property and entered an order accordingly without regard to the issue of the owner's actual or constructive knowledge. Gomez filed an interlocutory appeal in the Third District Court of Appeal. The Third District framed the issue on appeal as follows: [W]hether section 932.703(2)(a) of the Act requires the seizing agency to present some evidence at the adversarial preliminary hearing stage that the property owner knew or should have known that her property was employed or was likely to be employed in crimin...

...After reviewing the applicable statutory provisions, the Third District affirmed the trial court's seizure order, concluding: [B]ased on the plain language of the Act, Pinecrest, as the seizing agency, was not required to demonstrate at the adversarial preliminary hearing, conducted under section 932.703(2), that Gomez, as the real property owner, either knew, or should have known after a reasonable *183 inquiry, that her property was employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity....

...Because the trial court correctly determined that Pinecrest established the necessary probable cause at the adversarial preliminary hearing, the preforfeiture seizure of Gomez's real property was lawful. Id. at 327. In reaching this conclusion, the Third District reasoned: A careful review of section 932.703 reveals that the focus at the first stage of the process, the seizure stage, is on the property and whether there exists probable cause to believe that the property was used in violation of the Act (to conceal, transport, or possess contraband)....

...means to protect against disposal, waste, or continued illegal use of such property pending disposition of the forfeiture proceeding. The court may order the claimant to post a bond or other adequate security equivalent to the value of the property. § 932.703(2), Fla....

...1164 (citing § 932.704(8), Fla. Stat. (2002)). Moreover, after amendments to the Act in 1995, the Legislature shifted the burden to the seizing agency to establish the owner's actual or constructive knowledge in order to establish a forfeiture. [2] Section 932.703(6)(a) now provides: Property may not be forfeited under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act unless the seizing agency establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the owner either knew, or should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity. § 932.703(6)(a), Fla....

...this Court has long followed a policy that it must strictly construe forfeiture statutes." Real Property, 588 So.2d at 961. The plain and unambiguous language of the Act leads us to adopt the statutory construction set forth in the Third District's opinion in Gomez for several reasons. First, the plain language of section 932.703 indicates that forfeiture proceedings in Florida are a two-stage process, which includes a seizure stage and a forfeiture stage, as recognized by this Court in Velez. 934 So.2d at 1164 ("Forfeiture proceedings in Florida are a two-stage process."). Several subsections of 932.703 specifically distinguish between seizure and forfeiture. For example, section 932.703(1)(a) provides: *186 Any contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real property used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, or in, upon, or by means of which any violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act has taken or is taking place, may be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. (Emphasis added.) Similarly, section 932.703(1)(b) states: Notwithstanding any other provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, except the provisions of paragraph (a), contraband articles set forth in s....

...in, upon, or by means of which any violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act has taken or is taking place, shall be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. (Emphasis added.) See also § 932.703(2)(d), Fla....

...erty pending disposition of the forfeiture proceeding. The court may order the claimant to post a bond or other adequate security equivalent to the value of the property.") (emphasis added). Second, as explained in Gomez, the unambiguous language of section 932.703(2), which deals with the seizure stage of a forfeiture action, "clearly focuses on the property" and not the owner's actual or constructive knowledge. Gomez, 17 So.3d at 326. Section 932.703(2)(c) states in relevant part: When an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and take any testimony to determine whether there is probable cause to be...

...(Emphasis added.) Quite simply, under this unambiguous language, "[i]f law enforcement establishes [at the adversarial preliminary hearing] probable cause to believe that the property was used in violation of the Act, the court shall authorize the seizure or continued seizure of the property." Gomez, 17 So.3d at 326. Third, section 932.703(6)(a), which places the burden on the seizing agency to prove the owner's actual or constructive knowledge, clearly refers to the forfeiture stage of the proceedings, not the seizure stage: Property may not be forfeited under the Flor...

...Fifth Districts' decisions in Forfeiture of 1993 Lexus and Baggett. It is so ordered. CANADY, C.J., and LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Sections 932.701 through 932.706, Florida Statutes (2008), constitute the Act. Section 932.703(1)(a) provides: Any contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real property used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, or in, upon, or by means of which any viol...

...they [were required to] bear the burden in forfeiture proceedings of proving that they neither knew, nor should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being used or was likely to be used to commit an enumerated crime. See also § 932.703(6)(a), Fla....

...within the jurisdiction where the seizure or the offense occurred." (Emphasis added.) Section 932.701(2)(c) defines "promptly proceed" as "to file the complaint within 45 days after seizure." A separate provision also refers to this time limitation. Section 932.703 is entitled "Forfeiture of contraband article; exceptions." Subsection (3) provides: Neither replevin nor any other action to recover any interest in such property shall be maintained in any court, except *374 as provided in this act;...

...One 1988 Lincoln Town Car, 826 So.2d at 344. The Fifth District held to the contrary in One 1994 Honda Prelude, 730 So.2d at 336. In that case, the seizing agency waited over ten months after the seizure to even notify the petitioner of the seizure. The Fifth District concluded that section 932.703(3) allows the trial court to extend the 45-day filing requirement to 60 days for good cause, but that this time period runs from the date of seizure....

...[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. 92-54, § 1, Laws of Fla. The Legislature also amended section 932.703(3), which allowed an action for replevin if forfeiture proceedings were not initiated within 90 days after seizure, to allow a replevin action after only 45 days....

...Because the statute must be strictly construed, it follows that if the seizing agency fails to file the complaint within the prescribed time, the forfeiture proceeding can be dismissed on the claimant's motion. Where the seizing agency fails to file any action at all, section 932.703(3) allows a claimant to file a replevin action to recover the property....

...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....

...e. The Fifth District stated that the situation which called into question the constitutionality of the forfeiture statute was that (1) the forfeiture statute vests title to contraband articles in the seizing law enforcement agency upon seizure (now section 932.703(1)(c), Florida Statutes); (2) the owner from which the vehicle had been seized asserted a right to a prompt hearing; and (3) the statute prohibited all actions concerning the seized property except by the State, and there was no time requirement for the State to bring a forfeiture action....

...The Fifth District thereby held that the trial court was correct in denying the motion to dismiss and that the replevin action should proceed. In Lamar v. Universal Supply Co., 479 So.2d 109 (Fla.1985) ( Lamar II ), this Court reversed the Fifth District. We held that the purpose of section 932.703(1) was "to prevent a claimant from precipitating litigation over the seized property by forcing the state to file an immediate forfeiture action before it has had adequate opportunity to fully investigate and prepare its case." Id....

...as seized. For a reasonable period of time that person or entity could not proceed in court to attempt to recover title to the property. Between the time of the Fifth District's decision and this Court's decision in Lamar II, the Legislature amended section 932.703(1) to read: 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; however, such action may be maintained if forfeiture proceedings are not initiated within 90 days after the date of seizure. § 932.703(1), Fla....

...Judge Threadgill's opinion in Forfeiture of $7,750, 546 So.2d at 1130-31, explains the history and comes to a correct conclusion about this effect of the "shall promptly proceed" language in the statute: 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....

...Chicago Insurance Co., 410 So.2d 494, 497 (Fla.1982); Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Shatto, 487 So.2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Florida Medical Center v. Von Stetina, 436 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The revised staff analysis prepared on the 1985 amendment to section 932.703(1) expressly states that the provision here at issue "is an attempt to remedy the [fifth district] Lamar concerns by insuring that due process protections are extended to the property owner." Staff of Fla....

...Real Property, 588 So.2d 957 (Fla.1991): The process in the Act enables the state to seize property—whether real or personal—"which has been or is being used" to commit one of the enumerated offenses, or "in, upon or by means of which" any enumerated violation "has taken or is taking place." § 932.703(1), Fla....

..."upon producing due proof" that the property was being used in violation of the Act. Id. § 932.704(1). If the state does not initiate proceedings within ninety days after the seizure, the claimant may maintain an action to recover the property. Id. § 932.703(1)....

...ction, as held by the Fifth District in 1994 Honda Prelude, 730 So.2d at 335. The only actions which the language of the statute bars are replevin or any other action to recover the property during the forty-five days immediately after the seizures. § 932.703(3), Fla....

...bstituted for "document" or "any writing", the statute becomes absurd as there could never be a statutory or rule requirement for a "verified affidavit." But, in fact, there is at least one reference in Florida Statutes to a "verified affidavit," in section 932.703, Florida Statutes (2004), the statute dealing with forfeitures....

...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....

..., not mandatory." In re 1969 Chevrolet Camaro, 334 So.2d 82, 83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). 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))....

...ion of one among 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....

...ot prosecute Mr. Smith any further and that his truck, which has been seized and is currently subject to forfeiture, be returned to him. [2] The full text of the "Order Granting Forfeiture" is copied in the appendix to this opinion. [3] For example, section 932.703 mandates that contraband articles " shall be seized"; all rights, interest, and title thereto " shall immediately vest in the state upon seizure ......

...Any instrument required to be recorded by the provisions of this section takes effect from the date of its recordation and not from the date of its execution. [2] We recognize, of course, that parties such as bona fide lien holders also have standing based on section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1987)....

...Signature cards for the boxes authorized Amy Holt, Rick Montz, and Tom Norris to have access to them. Records showed that only Holt and Montz had gained access to the boxes since August 10. Based on the papers found in box 4179, the police identified fourteen individuals potentially entitled to receive notification under section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1995), of the City's intent to seek forfeiture of the items found in both boxes....

...e of the proceeding. *846 A mandatory requirement of the forfeiture act is that a seizing agency "make a diligent effort to notify the person entitled to notice of the seizure" of the personal property [2] which is the subject of the proceeding. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...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)....

...rd of the vehicle. Appellant was arrested and his vehicle was towed to the Lauderhill Police Department. On August 2, 1999, the City of Lauderhill ("city") sent a notice of forfeiture of the subject vehicle to appellant by certified mail pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1999)....

...Baruch, 718 So.2d 843 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). If an adversarial preliminary hearing is requested, the seizing agency must set and notice the hearing, which must be held within ten days after the request is received or as soon as practicable thereafter. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...Appellant also contends that he was denied a meaningful opportunity to be heard and fairly present his defense because he was not furnished a copy of the forfeiture complaint and supporting affidavits prior to the adversarial preliminary hearing. Appellant cites to section 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1999), which provides that when an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and take testimony to determine whether probable cau...

...We agree with appellant that he was denied his right to procedural due process because he was not given reasonable notice of the adversarial preliminary hearing. The city's need to "fast track" the proceeding to meet the ten-day requirement set forth in 932.703(2)(a) is not an extraordinary circumstance excusing it from providing constitutionally reasonable notice consistent with due process guarantees....

...(Emphasis added). In response to Real Property, the legislature amended the Act to provide, when personal property has been seized, that if a claimant requests a preliminary hearing, it "shall be held within 10 days after the request or as soon as practicable." Section 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...rly in regard to individual rights, we conclude that the 23 day delay between August 8 (which was the 10th day after claimants requested a hearing) and August 31 (when the hearing could have occurred if claimants had been ready) does not comply with section 932.703(2)(a), because the hearing did not occur in 10 days or as soon as was practicable....

...In a forfeiture proceeding, the caption should therefore identify the party seeking the forfeiture and the parties claiming an interest in it, if known. [2] Realty cannot be seized, except for the filing of a lis pendens, until after a preliminary hearing. § 932.703(2)(b)....

...November 27, 1985. Peggy M. Morris, Asst. Staff Atty., Orlando, for appellant. Hal Roen, Orlando, for appellee. ADKINS, Justice. We have for review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fifth District, which declared invalid a state statute, section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983)....

...Universal was notified shortly after the seizure that a forfeiture investigation was in progress regarding the subject vehicle. Universal filed a replevin action on July 29, seven days after the seizure, seeking to compel return of the vehicle. The sheriff responded with a motion to dismiss based on section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983)....

...t. (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. Stat. (1983). On appeal, the sheriff contended that (1) an action in replevin is prohibited by section 932.703(1) and (2) the trial court's failure to comply with the procedural requirements of section 78.067, Florida Statutes (1983), which directs issuance of a writ of replevin by the clerk of the court to the sheriff, rendered the writ void. The district court held that the prohibition of section 932.703(1) was invalid as violative of both due process and the access to courts provision of article I, section 21, Florida Constitution....

...The district court also noted that it was proper for the trial court to issue the writ directly when the sheriff was a defendant, rather than have the clerk issue the writ to the sheriff for execution against himself. For the reasons stated below, we find the district court in error on both points. The salutary purpose of section 932.703(1) is to prevent a claimant from precipitating litigation over the seized property by forcing the state to file an immediate forfeiture action before it has had adequate opportunity to fully investigate and prepare its case....

...tivities prior to the search as well as Munoz's varying statements about the source of this currency. II In a letter dated September 6, 1996, Munoz, through legal counsel, requested an adversarial preliminary hearing within ten days as prescribed by section 932.703(2)(a) (1995)....

...cient to meet the state's burden of establishing probable cause to believe that a nexus exists between the article seized and the narcotics activity, whether or not the use of the contraband article can be traced to a specific narcotics transaction. Section 932.703 provides that any contraband article may be seized and shall be forfeited and that all rights to it shall vest in the seizing law enforcement agency upon seizure....

...of Law Enforcement v. Real Property, 588 So.2d 957 (Fla.1991). Under the Act, a person whose property has been seized is entitled to a prompt adversarial preliminary hearing to determine whether probable cause exists to believe the property is contraband. § 932.703, Fla....

...4th DCA 2001). At the adversarial preliminary hearing, the City, as the seizing agency, carried the initial burden of proving that there was probable cause to believe that there was a nexus between the seized currency and elicit drug activities. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...possession [6] and, ultimately, to seize the currency. Probable Cause for Forfeiture Action. The forfeiture complaint alleged that the currency was contraband—that it represented narcotics proceeds or proceeds from other money laundering activity. Section 932.703(1)(a) of Florida's Contraband Forfeiture Act authorizes the seizure of any "contraband article." "Contraband article" is defined as: [a]ny ......

...traband Forfeiture Act—that is, used in a narcotics operation or other money laundering scheme. In forfeiture proceedings, the initial burden is on the state to show probable *1274 cause for the forfeiture at an adversarial preliminary hearing. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...suffer a forfeiture judgment under Florida law in connection with the allegations arising under the [Indictment filed *1317 against White Construction and other individuals] or any similar or related criminal or civil charges, they will, pursuant to Section 932.703 of the Florida Statutes, or comparable statutes that may be applicable, seek to satisfy that judgment by forfeiting assets other than any assets purchased by Martin Marietta, or to be utilized by Martin Marietta, pursuant to this Agreement....

...t recorded in the office of the Federal Aviation Administrator as required by section 329.01, Florida Statutes (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....

...When read as a whole and in conjunction with the rest of the chapter, the statute reflects an intent that title to motor vehicles in Florida may only be transferred pursuant to the provisions of chapter 319. [2] It is logical to conclude that the legislature intended for the protections of section 932.703(2) to extend only to those parties who have acquired ownership of their vehicles in a lawful manner....

...orded their liens with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. In re Forfeiture of One 1979 Chevrolet C10 Van, 490 So.2d 240 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Smith v. City of Miami Beach, 440 So.2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Admittedly, the language of section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1985), is more specific as related to liens in that it requires *138 the lien be perfected in the manner prescribed by law....

...Appellant raises two points on appeal from a final judgment of forfeiture, only one of which has merit. Appellant first asserts that the trial court erred in denying his motion for summary judgment because the state did not file the forfeiture action in a timely manner within 45 days as required by section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes....

...Julie Owen, and Jonathan Goodman of Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, P.A., Miami, for appellee. WARNER, C.J. In this forfeiture proceeding, the trial court denied appellants, Antoine Jean-Louis and his wife Desilia, standing to participate in the adversarial probable cause hearing held pursuant to section 932.703(c) and (d), Florida Statutes (1999), on the ground that appellants had signed a written waiver of standing....

...1981) (stating in acknowledged dictum that "It may well be that entitlement to the civil remedy of Section 1964 should be conditioned upon a criminal conviction or at least an indictment," 526 F. Supp. at 1022 n. 2); and (b) that a condition precedent to forfeiture of personal property under Section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1981), "which has been or is actually employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of, any felony," see § 932.701(2)(e), Fla....

...(3) To use any vessel, motor vehicle, or aircraft to facilitate the transportation, carriage, conveyance, concealment, receipt, possession, purchase, sale, barter, exchange, or giving away of any contraband article. (4) To conceal or possess any contraband article. 932.703 Forfeiture of vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or contraband article; exceptions....

...possession of drugs." Id. at 1201. We find that the legislature unambiguously intended that a forfeiture is proper under the instant facts. Section 932.702(4), added in 1980, makes it unlawful "to conceal or possess any contraband article." Further, section 932.703(1) in pertinent part states: "In any incident in which possession of any contraband article defined in s....

...is being 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). § 932.703(1), Fla....

...On the same day, Shelby made a demand for a post seizure adversarial hearing. The hearing was held on December 21, 2000, at which time Oakland had the burden of establishing probable cause for forfeiture of the property seized—a due process requirement. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...Officer Kelley testified the vehicle was seized on the earlier date, and that Oakland would 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)....

...Oakland claims it did not decide to seize the truck until November 22, 2000. As the trial judge noted, there is nothing in the evidence that gives this date any significance. It is the date of the seizure of the item sought to be later forfeited which starts the running of the time period in section 932.703(3), not the subjective determination by the governmental agency to seek forfeiture....

...See, In re: Forfeiture of One 1988 Lincoln Town Car, 826 So.2d 342 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. granted, 826 So.2d 992 (Fla.2002); In re Forfeiture of One (1) 1994 Honda Prelude, 730 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). [2] That is, the truck had previously been in a crash and was deemed unrebuildable. [3] Section 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...r the seizure and must state that a person entitled to notice may request an adversarial preliminary hearing within 15 days after receiving such notice ... Mercer as an "owner" was a party entitled to notice. § 932.701(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2000). [4] § 932.703(3), Fla....

...[2] In 1980, the legislature, in response to Griffis, amended the predecessor statutes. Ch. 80-68, §§ 1-3, Laws of Fla. The amendment dictates that any motor vehicle in which a felony amount of a controlled substance is possessed "shall be contraband subject to forfeiture" and "shall be seized." § 932.703, Fla....

...Methaqualone is a controlled substance, the possession of which is a second degree felony. §§ 893.03(1)(d), 893.13(1)(a)1., Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1982). Consequently, the motor vehicle in which the methaqualone was located at the time of the seizure is contraband subject to forfeiture. §§ 932.701, 932.703(1), Fla....

...Stat. (1981). The fact that a felony amount of a controlled substance was possessed and transported is sufficient to require forfeiture, Heinrich v. Miller, 444 So.2d 589 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Malick; Small, absent a showing of lack of knowledge under section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (1981)....

...(3) To use any vessel, motor vehicle, or aircraft to facilitate the transportation, carriage, conveyance, concealment, receipt, possession, purchase, sale, barter, exchange, or giving away of any contraband article. (4) To conceal or possess any contraband article. 932.703 Forfeiture of vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or contraband article; exceptions....

...that it has taken the subject property in a forfeiture action; the parties then have the right to request a post-seizure adversarial preliminary hearing, and such hearing must be held within 10 days of such request. See 588 So.2d at 965-66; see also § 932.703, Fla....

...The government argues that to satisfy the need for a fair and orderly proceeding, the claimant must be required to let the seizing agency know, in writing and prior to the hearing, if the claimant intends to assert a Fourth Amendment claim and what the nature of that claim will be. Section 932.703(2)(a) provides that a request for an adversarial preliminary hearing at which the government is required to establish probable cause that the property was used in violation of the Forfeiture Act must be made in writing....

...nd the government requests an opportunity to develop the evidence or to marshal the law in order to respond to the Fourth Amendment claim, the court should grant a continuance for a reasonable amount of time. Of course, pursuant to Real Property and section 932.703, the probable cause hearing should occur as soon as practicable....

...Rather than act immediately, the department waited until October 13th to file a verified complaint, a probable cause affidavit, and its motion for adversarial preliminary hearing. The following day, the trial court entered an order setting a hearing for October 18, 1995. Section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part: (2)(a) Personal property may be seized at the time of the violation or subsequent to the violation, if the person entitled to notice is notified at the time of the seizure or *205 b...

...ial preliminary hearing, if requested, will take place within ten days of the request. (emphasis added) The legislature responded to this opinion by inserting the provision requiring that a hearing be held within 10 days "or as soon as practicable." § 932.703(2)(a), Fla.Stat....

...rly in regard to individual rights, we conclude that the 23 day delay between August 8 (which was the 10th day after claimants requested a hearing) and August 31 (when the hearing could have occurred if claimants had been ready) does not comply with section 932.703(2)(a), because the hearing did not occur in 10 days or as soon as was practicable....

...ines under the authority of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. See §§ 932.701 — 932.707, Fla. Stat. (2004). The City served an Asset Seizure Notice on Ms. Gervais, and she responded by requesting an adversarial preliminary hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2004)....

...Morris, Orlando, for appellant. Hal Roen, Orlando, for appellee. COBB, Judge. This appeal raises the issue of the constitutionality of Florida's Contraband Forfeiture Act as amended effective July 1, 1980. The specific provision at issue herein is section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), which provides, in pertinent part: (1) Any ......

...either file a forfeiture proceeding against the vehicle before September 3 or otherwise to return it to Universal on that date. The argument of the sheriff at the hearing, as set forth in his written motion to dismiss, was based on the provisions of section 932.703, quoted above....

...Therefore, we consider the substantive, constitutional issue raised by this appeal. The sheriff cites us to two cases, Golding v. Director of Public Safety Dept., 400 So.2d 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), and Sawyer v. Gable, 400 So.2d 992 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), as supporting his view that the language from section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes, *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....

...State ex rel. City of Oviedo, 424 So.2d 152 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), which held that a six-month delay between seizure and filing of a forfeiture action was not so unreasonable as to defeat the action. It is also the position of the sheriff that since section 932.703(1), by its terms, purports to immediately vest title in the state to contraband articles, the claimant is no longer the owner of the property and, therefore, without standing to initiate an action for its return....

...139, 88 S.Ct. 754, 19 L.Ed.2d 966 (1968); Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U.S. 51, 85 S.Ct. 734, 13 L.Ed.2d 649 (1965). It is also violative of the access provision found in Article I, Section 21, Florida Constitution (1968). We hold the following sentence in section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), to be unconstitutional: 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....

...ective criminal action, and no forfeiture action has been filed by the state attorney. From the record before us, that appears to be the situation in the instant case. The sheriff herein relied solely on the statutory prohibition against replevin in section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), to support his motion to dismiss....

...*323 Richard J. Diaz, for appellant. Cynthia A. Everett, Miami, for appellee. Before SHEPHERD, ROTHENBERG, and LAGOA, JJ. ROTHENBERG, J. Zenaida Gomez ("Gomez") appeals from a non-final order entered following an adversarial preliminary hearing, conducted under section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2007), of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act ("Act"), finding probable cause for the preforfeiture seizure of her real property....

...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)....

...Additionally, Pinecrest noted that Gomez leased the property to someone she never met and that she had taken absolutely no steps to verify Mr. Herrera's identity or that the driver's license she was shown was legitimate. In response, Gomez's counsel argued that to grant a preliminary order of seizure pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Pinecrest was required to present some evidence that Gomez knew, or should have known after reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity....

...The trial court concluded that the evidence presented established probable cause to believe that the subject property was being used in violation of the Act and ordered preforfeiture seizure of Gomez's real property. This non-final appeal ensued. The issue that we must decide is whether section 932.703(2)(a) of the Act requires the seizing agency to present some evidence at the adversarial preliminary hearing *325 stage that the property owner knew or should have known that her property was employed or was likely to be employed in c...

...Miami-Dade County Police Dep't, 934 So.2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 2006); see also Alvarez v. City of Hialeah, 900 So.2d 761, 765 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) ("Our standard of review of an order finding probable cause after an adversarial preliminary hearing, under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, is de novo."). Section 932.703(1)(a) provides that "[a]ny contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real property used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act ......

...ngs in Florida are a two-stage process." Velez, 934 So.2d at 1164 (emphasis added). The first stage addresses seizure of the property and provides for an adversarial preliminary hearing, whereas, the second stage is the actual forfeiture proceeding. Section 932.703 governs the procedure a seizing agency must follow when it seizes or restrains property under the Act. Subsection (1) is the general provision providing for the seizure and forfeiture of contraband used in violation of the Act. Subsection (2) pertains to the first state of the proceedings under section 932.703, the seizure stage....

...Unlike subsection (2), which addresses the seizure stage, subsection (6) addresses the forfeiture stage of the proceedings. Thus, forfeiture proceedings in Florida involve a two-stage process, with each stage clearly defined by statute. Subsection (2) of section 932.703, the seizure stage of the process, provides, in relevant part as follows: (a) Personal property may be seized at the time of the violation or subsequent to the violation, if the person entitled to notice is notified at the time of the...

...means to protect against disposal, waste, or continued illegal use of such property pending disposition of the forfeiture proceeding. The court may order the claimant to post a bond or other adequate security equivalent to the value of the property. § 932.703(2) (emphasis added)....

...operty and order that the property be restrained by the least restrictive means to protect against its disposal or illegal use pending disposition of the forfeiture proceeding. Stage two of the process is the subsequent forfeiture proceeding, and subsection 932.703(6) is the subsection that deals with this stage of the process. Section 932.703(6)(a) provides: Property may not be forfeited under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act unless the seizing agency establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the owner either knew, or should have known after a reasonably inq...

...ty owned jointly by spouses; and subsection (6)(d), which addresses vehicles that are rented or leased, all contain the knowledge element which must be established at the forfeiture stage and before the property may be forfeited. A careful review of section 932.703 reveals that the focus at the first stage of the process, the seizure stage, is on the property and whether there exists probable cause to believe that the property was used in violation of the Act (to conceal, transport, or possess contraband)....

...ust also prove that the owner or owners knew or should have known that the property was being used or was likely to be used for an illegal purpose. Counsel for Gomez urges this Court to find that, although the Legislature did not include language in section 932.703(2) requiring that the seizing agency present some evidence of the owner's knowledge that the property was being used for an illegal purpose at the seizure/adversarial *327 preliminary stage, and the Legislature did include that language in section 932.703(6), which deals with the forfeiture stage of the proceedings, we should find that this requirement must be met at both stages of the proceedings....

...ts illegal use and the owner's knowledge of its illegal use. We therefore conclude that based on the plain language of the Act, Pinecrest, as the seizing agency, was not required to demonstrate at the adversarial preliminary hearing, conducted under section 932.703(2), that Gomez, as the real property owner, either knew, or should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that her property was employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity....

...Thus, we find only the conflict previously noted with the First District in Karr. Order under review, affirmed; conflict certified. LAGOA, J., concurs. SHEPHERD, J., dissenting. I respectfully dissent. I believe the First District Court of Appeal correctly interpreted section 932.703(6)(a), Florida Statutes (2007), to require a preliminary showing that the owner knew or should have known, after reasonable inquiry, that the property was employed or likely to be employed in criminal activity for it to be seized....

...1st DCA 2001)." Id. at 192 (emphasis added). In Karr, 798 So.2d at 10, the First District Court of Appeal considered a single issue: "[W]hether there must be some preliminary showing of such owner knowledge in order to establish probable cause in a section 932.703(2)(c) adversarial preliminary hearing." As the majority recognizes, the holding of that case is: that establishment of "probable cause to believe that [ ] property was ......

...The state appeals the trial court's order granting appellee Daniel Pomerance's motion to suppress. We reverse. Appellee was arrested at Sambo's Restaurant in Lee County, Florida, for conspiracy to deliver cocaine. The automobile driven by appellee was then seized by the officers pursuant to sections 932.702 and 932.703, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...pellee's arrest. If so, the search of the trunk of the car was a proper inventory search. Godbee v. State, 224 So.2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Waterhouse v. State, 256 So.2d 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). We have found no case addressing this issue. However, section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1981), which provides for the forfeiture of motor vehicles used to transport, conceal, or facilitate the sale of contraband, in violation of section 932.703, no-where mentions obtaining a warrant; it simply states that an offending vehicle "shall be seized." We know of no rationale for judicially engrafting onto the statute a requirement that a warrant be obtained....

...[2] Prior to his arrest, the arresting police officers had determined to seize White's automobile under the Forfeiture Act on the grounds that, based on police eye-witnesses and videotape, it had been used in the delivery and sale of cocaine. As contemplated by the Forfeiture Act, section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1993), no prior court order or warrant was issued authorizing the seizure....

...pt requested, that there is a right to a(sic) adversarial preliminary hearing after the seizure to determine whether probable cause exists to believe that such property has been or is being used in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...g must be set and noticed by the seizing agency and held by the court within 10 days of receipt of the hearing request or as soon as practicable thereafter. Id. At the hearing, the court must determine whether probable cause existed for the seizure. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...Under the Forfeiture Act, the seizing agency is required only to have probable cause to believe that the property sought to be seized "was used, is being used, was attempted to be used, or was intended to be used" in violation of the Forfeiture Act. § 932.703(2)(c), Fla....

...ee. Before HENDRY, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ. PER CURIAM. The interest of a lienholder, whose lien had not been perfected, was subject to forfeiture when the liened property, an automobile, was seized by the city while being used in criminal activity. § 932.703, Fla....

...en such lien is noted upon the face of the certificate of title or on a duplicate or corrected copy thereof. § 319.27(1), Fla. Stat. (1981); Barnett Bank *612 of Clearwater, N.A. v. Rompon, 377 So.2d 981, 983 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Affirmed. NOTES [1] Section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1981) provides in part: No bona fide lienholder's interest shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss....

...*34 Dan R. Warren and Craig Stephen Boda of Judge & Warren, P.A., Daytona Beach, for appellant. Catherine A. Riley of Blumenthal, Schwartz & Riley, P.A., Titusville, for appellee. COWART, Judge. We affirm the forfeiture of appellant's pickup truck under section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1981), because there was evidence from which the trial judge, as trier of the facts, logically deducted the conclusion that appellant unlawfully transported, carried or conveyed § 932.702, Fla....

...Seizure and forfeiture in Florida are governed by Sections 932.701-.704, Florida Statutes, the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. [6] The Act provides for the seizure of "any vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, and other personal property" carrying contraband. § 932.703....

...at the forfeiture statute was not violated. But a successful claimant becomes entitled only to the return of his property. In Re Approximately Forty-Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars in U.S. Currency, 432 So.2d 1382, 1385 n. 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); § 932.703(1)....

...[2] Section 932.701 defines "contraband article" as, among other things, any controlled substance defined in Chapter 893, which includes marijuana. 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....

...Shortly thereafter, the state abandoned appellee's prosecution and declared a "no action." Appellee immediately moved for the return of his jeep claiming that, in light of the state's decision not to file formal charges, the jeep was not contraband within the meaning of the forfeiture statute. Based on section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1989), the city argued against appellee's motion....

...ing, but not limited to, any ... weapon ... [or] vehicle of any kind ... which has been or is actually employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting the commission of, any felony." § 932.701(2)(e), Fla. Stat. (1989). Section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1989) clearly 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; however, such action may be maintained...

...onsole of the car. The city filed a petition for forfeiture of the Camaro and the currency. We conclude that the trial court's denial of the petition was correct. Grounds for forfeiture are contained in sections 932.701-703, Florida Statutes (1983). Section 932.703 is to the effect that any motor vehicle which is contraband as defined in section 932.701(2)(e), or which has been used in violation of section 932.702, "shall be forfeited......

...This money belongs to the business I own and operate. 4. This money represents proceeds from and working capital used in the business activities of the business I own and operate. /S/ ________________ Vladimir Gonzalez (R. 33). Gonzalez requested an adversary preliminary hearing. See § 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2001)....

...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....

...The sham pleading rule may also be applicable. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.150. The proceeding below was held on the claimant's request for an adversary preliminary hearing. In such a hearing the issue for consideration is whether there was probable cause for the seizure. § 932.703(2)(c), Fla....

...cy, which has been or is actually employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of, any felony. (emphasis added) Section 932.702(4) [3] makes it unlawful to conceal or possess any contraband article. Section 932.703 outlines the procedure for the forfeiture of any contraband article used in violation of section 932.702....

...te to forfeiture. AFFIRMED. ORFINGER, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur. NOTES [1] §§ 932.701-932.704, Fla. Stat. (1981). [2] Formerly section 943.41(2)(e), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1980). [3] Formerly section 943.42, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1980). [4] Section 932.703, formerly section 943.43, Florida Statutes (Supp....

...he was being detained. The jail received the Notice on November 9, 2001, but the corrections officers did not deliver it to Chuck until November 15, 2001. On November 27, 2001, Chuck sent a request for an adversarial preliminary hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2000), claiming the $380,015.00 which was taken from him on November 3, 2001....

...On December 17, 2001, the parties agreed to continue the hearing to December 19, 2001. At the hearing on December 19, 2001, Chuck moved to dismiss the forfeiture action for failure to hold the adversarial preliminary hearing within ten days after the request was received or as soon as practicable thereafter, pursuant to section 932.703(2)a), Florida Statutes (2000)....

...This Court reversed the trial court's order and remanded the case for entry of an order dismissing the forfeiture proceeding. In reaching our decision, we did not address the specific issue of standing. We reversed because Chuck was not given a preliminary hearing within the ten day-period provided in section 932.703, Florida Statutes (2000)....

...3d DCA 2001), Piqueras v. State, 770 So.2d 229, 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), and Munoz v. City of Coral Gables, 695 So.2d 1283 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). The trial court further found that there was probable cause for Pinecrest's seizure of the $60,600, pursuant to section 932.703, Florida Statutes (2000)....

...Under Florida's Contraband Forfeiture Act, a person with standing has the right to litigate the issue of probable cause at an adversarial preliminary hearing. See City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Baruch, 718 So.2d 843, 846 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Specifically, only a person entitled to notice under section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes, is entitled to an adversarial preliminary hearing....

...To obtain an adversarial preliminary hearing, the clear language of the Act requires a "person entitled to notice" to do one thing: within 15 days after receipt of the statutorily mandated notice informing him of the seizure and his right to an adversarial preliminary hearing, he must request that such a hearing be held. See § 932.703(2)(a)(9)(e), Fla....

...of the request. Id. at 965-66. In response to this mandate, Florida's forfeiture statute provides that an adversarial preliminary hearing is to be held within ten days after the request is received or as soon as practicable thereafter, according to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes....

...the seizure. See § 932.701(2)(f), Fla. Stat. (2003). At the adversarial preliminary hearing, the court determines "whether there is probable cause to believe that the property was used ... in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act." See § 932.703(2)(c)....

...iana. None of the accounts were located in Florida. The Seminole County Sheriff also seized four automobiles: two in Volusia County, one in Pinellas County, and one in Duval County. Appellants requested an adversarial preliminary hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2013)....

...Since the bill of sale had not been recorded in the office of the Federal Aviation Administrator of the United States and record title was still in the original owner, appellant is not the owner of the aircraft within the meaning of the forfeiture statute and his interest is not subject to the protection of section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (1985)....

...joint owners, whereas the City's ordinance does not. Under the Forfeiture Act, the government must provide an exception for innocent owners. See Department of Law Enforcement v. Real Property, 588 So.2d 957, 968 (Fla.1991). Under the Forfeiture Act, section 932.703(6)(a), Florida Statutes (2002), property may not be forfeited unless the seizing agency establishes by a preponderance of evidence, that the owner either knew, or should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity. Section 932.703(6)(b) provides that a bona fide lienholder's interest that has been perfected in the manner prescribed by law prior to the seizure may not be forfeited under the Forfeiture Act unless the seizing agency establishes by a preponderance...

...ployed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity. Furthermore, property that is titled or registered between husband and wife jointly may not be forfeited without the same "knew or should have known" proof by a preponderance of the evidence. § 932.703(c), Fla. Stat. (2002). In addition, jointly owned vehicles and leased or rented vehicles have protections from forfeiture. § 932.703(d), Fla....

...marijuana. In addition, section 932.701(2)(e) defines contraband to include a vehicle which has been employed in aiding or abetting in the commission of a felony. Under either of these circumstances, the vehicle is subject to forfeiture pursuant to section 932.703(1)....

...Smith and his mother were directed to report to the sheriffs office. According to the allegations of the complaint, when they reported on October 13, 2005, they were each instructed to execute a quitclaim deed. No forfeiture proceedings, as required by the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, section 932.703 et seq., Florida Statutes, were conducted, Smith alleged....

...The Court, based on this evidence, found that an equitable lien had been created in favor of Basil Scaglione and ordered the return of the vehicle. A lienholder's interest in a motor vehicle subject to forfeiture under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act is entitled to protection, but only under certain circumstances. Section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1985), provides: (3) No bona fide lienholder's interest shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss....

...under the seat of the car. The trial court, finding respondent's testimony not credible, entered a final judgment of forfeiture. Respondent contends here that the trial court erred in holding that she did not meet her burden of proof, as imposed by Section 932.703(2), to show that she neither knew nor should have known, after reasonable inquiry, that her vehicle was likely to be used in criminal activity....

...e keys to her vehicle in the house she shared with Mr. Cameron, the latter was likely to use her vehicle to carry his handgun and to conceal it while driving. The forfeiture must nonetheless fail if based on the crime of carrying a concealed weapon. Section 932.703(1) provides for forfeiture of a motor vehicle in which contraband is discovered if possession of such contraband article constitutes a felony....

...White, Asst. State Atty., Pensacola, for appellee. ZEHMER, Judge. Richard Crenshaw appeals an order forfeiting his 1984 Volvo automobile to the Pensacola Police Department pursuant to its petition to show cause under sections 932.701, 932.702, and 932.703, Florida Statutes (1985)....

...(3) To use any vessel, motor vehicle, or aircraft to facilitate the transportation, carriage, conveyance, concealment, receipt, possession, purchase, sale, barter, exchange, or giving away of any contraband article. (4) To conceal or possess any contraband article. Section 932.703(1) provides: Any vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, and other personal property which has been or is being used in violation of any provision of s....

...Appellee counters that the statute contains no requirement that the vehicle be used to conceal or facilitate the illicit possession so long as the person possessing the contraband drug is found in the vehicle, and, relying primarily on the presumption accorded it in section 932.703(1), argues that illicit possession for any use whatsoever of less than one gram of cocaine while the possessor is in or upon a vehicle satisfies the forfeiture requirements in section 932.702-.703....

...sand Nine Hundred Dollars ($48,900) in U.S. Currency, 432 So.2d 1382 (Fla.4th DCA 1983). To meet its burden of proof, the department is entitled to show Crenshaw's possession of contraband cocaine and rely upon the rebuttable presumption provided in section 932.703(1) for the inference that Crenshaw's vehicle was being used or intended to be used for a prohibited purpose specified in the statute, i.e., "to facilitate the transportation, carriage, conveyance, concealment, receipt, possession, pur...

...times lent her car to these people if asked. She stated that she had no knowledge that Vathis or Zengri or anyone else to whom she lent the car was involved in the drug trade. The outcome of this appeal is controlled by the application of Fla. Stat. section 932.703(2) (1983) to the facts presented below....

...Accordingly, the judgment of forfeiture is REVERSED. WENTWORTH, J., concurs. ERVIN, J., dissents with written opinion. ERVIN, Judge, dissenting with opinion. In my judgment the majority has failed to place the proper legal significance upon the statutory provision added to Section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes, by Chapter 80-68, Section 3, Laws of Florida....

...re statutes authorizing forfeitures must be strictly construed, General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. State, 152 Fla. 297, 11 So.2d 482 (1943), I do not consider that the majority has taken proper account of the "knew nor should have known" language of Section 932.703(2). If the majority interprets section 932.703(2) as placing the burden upon the government to establish the owner's actual knowledge of her automobile's involvement in criminal activity, I submit such a construction is at variance with a plain reading of the statute....

...at 690, 94 S.Ct. at 2095, 40 L.Ed.2d at 472. Admittedly, the federal statutes, particularly 19 U.S.C. § 1595a, 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4), and 49 U.S.C. § 782, relating to forfeiture, do not have any provision, as does the Florida statute, relating to scienter. Section 932.703(2) represents an apparent accommodation between the federal rule requiring forfeiture, regardless of an owner's knowledge, and the former state rule placing the burden on the government to demonstrate that the owner had actual knowledge that his property had been employed in criminal activity....

...e Hundred Dollars ($48,900.00) In U.S. Currency, 432 So.2d 1382, 1385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). If the government presents sufficient proof of the vehicle's illegal use, the burden next shifts to the owner to establish the affirmative defense required by section 932.703(2)....

...3d DCA 1982); Golden Dolphin No. 2, Inc. v. State, Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, 403 So.2d 1372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). I see no reason why the same construction, applied to statutes regulating beverage licenses, should not also be placed upon section 932.703(2)....

...In 1983, the Second District directly confronted the issue of whether a preseizure warrant needed to be obtained. The Second District held that it did not in State v. Pomerance, 434 So.2d 329, 330 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), stating: We have found no case addressing this issue. However, section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1981), which provides for the forfeiture of motor vehicles used to transport, conceal, or facilitate the sale of contraband, in violation of section 932.703, nowhere mentions obtaining a warrant; it simply states that an offending vehicle "shall be seized." We know of no rationale for judicially engrafting onto the statute a requirement that a warrant be obtained....

...y time period. Applying these principles to the reading of Florida's Contraband Forfeiture Act, we note that the statutory language expressly permits a trial court to retain jurisdiction in a forfeiture case for up to 60 days if good cause is shown. Section 932.703(3) of the Florida Statutes provides: 932.703....

...pt as provided in this act; however, such action may be maintained if forfeiture proceedings are not initiated within 45 days after the date of seizure. However, if good cause is shown, the court may extend the aforementioned prohibition to 60 days. § 932.703(3), Fla....

...The petition alleged that when Butler was arrested on January 27, 1997, he was carrying $1,037 in U.S. currency which was seized by the Melbourne Police Department pursuant to the provisions of the "Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act"; [1] that Butler requested the preliminary "probable cause" hearing under section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes; that Butler received notice on February 19, 1997 that a preliminary probable cause hearing would be held the following day; that Butler was never transported from the Brevard County Jail, where he was being he...

...controlled substance, gambling paraphernalia, equipment violating the beverage or tobacco laws, motor fuel with unpaid tax, etc. — or a vessel, motor vehicle or aircraft used in the transportation, possession or concealment of such contraband. See § 932.703(1), Fla....

...Respondent's attorney argued in response that petitioner had not been prejudiced by respondent's delay in filing the forfeiture complaint and that the trial court had properly extended the 45-day time period for filing the complaint to 60 days. She relied upon section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1997) which says: (3) 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; however, such action may be maintained if forfeiture proceedings are not initiated within 45 days after the date of seizure....

...This court ordered respondent to show cause why the petition for writ of prohibition should not be granted. In its response, respondent alleged that it had, with good cause, filed its forfeiture complaint within 60 days of the trial court's order directing it to do so in accordance with section 932.703(3), referenced above....

...It argued specifically that on May 27, 1998, the trial court had ordered it to file its complaint within 20 days of the date of its order. It had done so by filing a forfeiture complaint on June 16, 1998. Thus, respondent concluded that its complaint was filed within the 60-day period allowed in section 932.703(3)....

...t 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. Admittedly, section 932.703(3) allows the trial court to extend the 45-day filing requirement to 60 days for good cause....

...Millender noticed the state of the hearing on both her motion to suppress and her motion for an adversarial preliminary hearing. At an adversarial preliminary hearing, the trial court must determine whether the seized property is subject to forfeiture under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. §§ 932.701(2)(f) and 932.703, Fla....

...at the evidence presented did not provide probable cause for the retention of the $18,800. The state nevertheless claims that the trial court could not return the currency to Millender until the county initiated a forfeiture proceeding, relying upon section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1993), which provides: 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; however, such action may be maintained if forfeiture proceedings are not initiated within 45 days after the date of seizure. (Emphasis added.) The meaning of "such property" in this provision depends upon the immediately preceding provisions in section 932.703. Section 932.703(2)(c), addressing the subject of the adversarial preliminary hearing, provides: [T]he court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents *937 and take any testimony to determine whether there is probable caus...

...rfeiture Act. If probable cause is established, the court shall authorize the seizure or continued seizure of the subject contraband. (Emphasis added.) Once property is detained after a judicial determination that there is probable cause pursuant to section 932.703(2)(c), the court is required by section 932.703(2)(d) to order " such property " restrained by the least restrictive means. Thereafter, section 932.703(3), quoted above, limits actions for replevin of " such property. " Accordingly, the replevin prohibition for " such property " in section 932.703(3) refers only to the property for which the court has ordered seizure or continued seizure under section 932.703(2)(c)....

...Because the state made an insufficient showing of probable cause to seize the currency in the case at bar, the court did not order continued seizure; hence subsections (2)(d) and (3) were inapplicable. Moreover, we consider that the last sentence of section 932.703(2)(c) implicitly authorized the trial court to return the seized currency to Millender....

...The police discovered contraband on board and seized the boat. Appellee with knowledge of the pending forfeiture proceeding filed a separate replevin action seeking return of its property. Appellant filed a motion to dismiss the replevin action based on section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983). The trial court denied appellant's motion. We reverse on the authority of Lamar v. Universal Supply Co., 479 So.2d 109 (Fla. 1985). Section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), precludes the maintenance of a replevin action during the pendency of a forfeiture action. [1] We remand this cause for entry of an order dismissing the replevin action. REVERSED and REMANDED. DOWNEY, ANSTEAD and DELL, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Effective October 1, 1985, section 932.703(1) was amended to allow a replevin action if forfeiture proceedings are not initiated within ninety days after the date of seizure....

...Cameron, Orlando, for Appellee. ANTOON, J. In this civil forfeiture case, the Sheriff of Orange County, Kevin B. Beary, is seeking forfeiture of $8,380 which was found in Carole Gay's luggage during a search of a car in which she was a passenger. See § 932.703, Fla....

...He was later arrested and police seized the car after discovering marijuana in the trunk. The state initiated forfeiture proceedings and the circuit court entered a judgment of forfeiture. [3] The district court in Wheeler v. State, 472 So.2d 847, 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), reversed the judgment of forfeiture. It found under section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (1985), that Wheeler "neither knew nor should have known" of the illegal use and that the forfeiture therefore was improper....

...To prevail in an action for malicious prosecution, the claimant must prove that there was an absence of probable cause to initiate proceedings. Burns v. GCC Beverages, Inc., 502 So.2d 1217, 1218 (Fla. 1986). Here, Wheeler conceded that respondents had probable cause to seize her car as contraband under section 932.703....

...may be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of this act. All rights and interest in and title to [such motor vehicle] ... 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... . § 932.703(1), Fla....

...Duffe had assigned his interest in the aircraft to him. Although appellant raises four constitutional questions, we decline to address them because the claim of standing by appellant is so vacuous as to preclude such consideration. See State ex rel. Pringle v. Dykes, 127 Fla. 665, 173 So. 904 (1937). Section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (1981), provides as follows: No property shall be forfeited under the provisions of ss....

...Regarding the order of forfeiture, we find the facts to present a sufficient nexus between the van and the illegal drug transaction to bring the van within the definition of "contraband article" under *986 section 932.701(2)(e), [1] and to make the van subject to forfeiture under sections 932.702(3) and 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1981)....

...[2] § 932.702 provides that it is unlawful: (3) To use any vessel, motor vehicle, or aircraft to facilitate the transportation, carriage, conveyance, concealment, receipt, possession, purchase, sale, barter, exchange, or giving away of any contraband article. § 932.703(1): Any vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, and other personal property which has been or is being used in violation of any provision of s....

...We agree with Beary's contention in regard to the existence of probable cause for the initial seizure of the property. To the extent that the appealed order purports to find otherwise, we disagree with it. But that was not the pivotal issue before the trial court. The section governing adversarial preliminary hearings, section 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes, reads: *581 When an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and take any testimony to determine whether there is probable cause...

...y hearing is to determine whether there "is" probable cause to believe that a violation of the Act occurred or is occurring, not whether there "was" probable cause to believe that a violation of the Act occurred at the time of seizure. Additionally, section 932.703(2)(c) unambiguously provides that at an adversarial preliminary hearing, the trial court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and take any testimony to determine the issue of probable cause at the adversarial preliminary hearing....

...Miami-Dade County Police Dep't, 934 So.2d 1162, 1164 (Fla.2006). The first stage is the adversarial preliminary hearing wherein the seizing agency must establish probable cause that the seized property was used, attempted to be used, or intended to be used in violation of the Forfeiture Act. Id. ; § 932.703(2)(c), Fla....

...is required to establish probable cause that the property subject to forfeiture was used in violation of the [Forfeiture Act]." If probable cause is established, the court must "authorize the seizure or continued seizure of the subject contraband." § 932.703(2)(c), Fla....

...However, "[p]roperty may not be forfeited . . . unless the seizing agency establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the owner either knew, or should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity." § 932.703(6)(a), Fla....

...t favored in the law or equity. However, our holding is predicated on the statutory language and its legislative history. Prior to 1995, the burden was on the owner of the seized property to establish lack of knowledge as an affirmative defense. See § 932.703(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (1994). This was commonly known as the "innocent owner" defense. See Dep't of Law Enforcement v. Real Property, 588 So.2d 957 (Fla.1991). In 1995, section 932.703(6)(a) was amended and the legislature placed the burden of proof on the seizing agency to show that the owner was not innocent. Under the current version, "[p]roperty may not be forfeited" unless the seizing agency proves the owner is not innocent. § 932.703(6)(a), Fla....

...City of Coral Gables, 695 So.2d 1283, 1284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). 2 Patel argues that the evidence presented by the State at the adversarial preliminary hearing failed to establish any link between the alleged criminal activity and the subject bank accounts as required by section 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2013), and, as a result, that the trial court erred when it found probable cause to continue the seizure of his assets. The State concedes this point, but argues that, independent of the actual use of the subject property, section 932.703(5)(a), permits the seizure of Patel’s accounts as “substitute assets” for the illegal cash proceeds acquired, but not located or seized. Because we hold that section 932.703(5) does not authorize the seizure of substitute assets prior to a forfeiture hearing, we reverse....

...The FCFA permits law enforcement agencies to seize any contraband article used in violation of the FCFA, and states that “[a]ll rights to, interest in, and title to contraband articles used in violation of [section] 932.702 shall immediately vest in the seizing law enforcement agency upon seizure.” § 932.703(l)(c), Fla....

...Personal property may be seized at the time of the violation, or subsequent to the violation, if the person entitled to notice is noticed of the right to an adversarial preliminary hearing, the purpose of which is to determine whether probable cause exists to believe that the property was used in violation of the FCFA. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...to protect against disposal, waste, or continued illegal use of such property pending disposition of the forfeiture proceeding. The *1243 court may order the claimant to post a bond or other adequate security equivalent to the value of the property. § 932.703(2)(c) and (d), Fla....

...ng employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity. Gomez v. Village of Pinecrest, 41 So.3d 180, 188 (Fla.2010). It is enough to show that the subject property was used in violation of the FCFA. Id. At issue in this case is the meaning of section 932.703(5), which contains a “substitute assets” provision, and whether this section permits the State to pursue a civil forfeiture directly against “substitute assets” that have no nexus to the criminal offense. Section 932.703(5) provides: (5) The court shall order the forfeiture of any other property of a claimant, excluding lienholders, up to the value of any property subject to forfeiture under this section if any of the property described in this sectio...

...Balkwill, 858 So.2d 371 , 373 (Fla.2003). And, any ambiguity in the forfeiture statutes must be construed against forfeiture. DeGregorio, 853 So.2d at 373. In Florida, forfeiture proceedings are a two-stage process. Gomez, 41 So.3d at 184 . The first stage, outlined in section 932.703(2), involves the seizure of property, where, if an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, “ ‘the seizing agency is required to establish probable cause that the property subject to forfeiture was used in violation of the Forfeit...

...The second stage is the forfeiture stage, involving the actual forfeiture proceeding. Id. During the forfeiture trial, the court or jury will determine whether the subject property will be forfeited. Id.; see also §§ 932.701(2)(g) and 932.704, Fla. Stat. (2013). The various subsections of section 932.703 specifically distinguish between the two stages. Gomez, 41 So.3d at 185 . For example, section 932.703(l)(a) provides: Any contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real property used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, or in, upon, or by means of which any violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act has taken or is taking place, may be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. (Emphasis added). Likewise, section 932.703(l)(b) sets forth: Notwithstanding any other provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, except the provisions of paragraph (a), contraband articles set forth in s....

...used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, or in, upon, or by means of which any violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act has taken or is taking place, shall be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. (Emphasis added). And, section 932.703(2)(d), which directs the court in the event it determines probable cause exists to believe the subject property was used in violation of the FCFA provides: If the court determines that probable cause exists to believe that such proper...

...al, waste, or continued illegal use of such property pending disposition of the forfeiture proceeding. The court may order the claimant to post a bond or other adequate security equivalent to the value of the property. (Emphasis added). In contrast, section 932.703(5) references only the forfeiture stage, providing in pertinent part: The court shall order the forfeiture of any other property of a claimant, excluding lienholders, up to the value of any property subject to forfeiture under this section .......

...It is a general principle of statutory construction that where the legislature includes wording in one section of a statute and not another section of the same statute, it is presumed to have been intentionally excluded. See Beach v. Great W. Bank, 692 So.2d 146, 152 (Fla.1997). Here, the plain and unambiguous language of section 932.703, leads us to conclude that subsection (5) refers only to the forfei *1245 ture stage of the proceedings and not the seizure stage....

...that the owner knew, or should have known after reasonable inquiry, that the subject property was being employed or likely to be employed in criminal activity, clearly refers to the forfeiture stage, not the seizure stage). Accordingly, we hold that section 932.703(5) does not authorize the seizure of substitute assets prior to forfeiture; rather it is intended to be used once a forfeiture has been ordered and cannot be satisfied due to the circumstances outlined therein. See Campbell v. Racetrack Bingo, Inc., 75 So.3d 321, 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (explaining that if the sheriff had ultimately prevailed in the forfeiture proceeding, section 932.703(5) would have entitled him to forfeit other property if the subject property could no longer be located)....

...currency and not the issuance of a lis pendens, we find it distinguishable. .Neither Sonya Patel nor Jigger Patel contested the forfeiture. . Satish Patel and Jigger Patel are not related. . Relying on a number of federal cases, the State argues that section 932.703(5) allows it to seize "innocent” assets pretrial, as a "substitute” for the contraband which can be seized under the Act....

...trumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of any felony. See §§ 932.701(2)(a)5., 932.702(4), Fla. Stat. (2000). Personal property may be seized at the time of violation or subsequent to violation of the Act. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...t property shall be forfeited. See §§ 932.701(2)(g), 932.704, Fla. Stat. (2000). The purpose of an adversarial preliminary hearing is to determine whether probable cause exists to believe the property at issue was used in violation of the Act. See § 932.703(2)(b), Fla....

...3d DCA 1986), and even by hearsay evidence, see In re Forfeiture of 1983 Wellcraft Scarab, 487 So.2d 306, 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Id. (quoting In re Forfeiture of One Hundred Seventy One Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($171,900) in U.S. Currency, 711 So.2d 1269, 1274 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)). Section 932.703(2)(c) sets forth what the trial court should review when making the probable cause determination: When an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and ta...

...Real Prop., 588 So.2d 957, 961 (Fla.1991)). The property seized in this case consisted of several bank accounts owned by various members of the Masino family and companies associated with the Masinos and them businesses, including Racetrack Bingo, Inc. Under the procedures set out in section 932.703, Florida Statutes, Sheriff *323 Campbell obtained a Forfeiture Seizure Warrant for the subject accounts, and the owners of the accounts were notified of the action and their right to a hearing on the matter. The issue to be determined at the hearing was “whether there is probable cause to believe that the property was used, is being used, was attempted to be used, or was intended to be used, in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act.” § 932.703(2)(c), Fla....

...ations of the statute regulating bingo, but correctly noted that the determination of whether the Masinos or any other persons were guilty of violating section 849.0931 (the bingo statute) was not before the court in the forfeiture proceedings under section 932.703....

...Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act.” Despite the sheriffs argument to the contrary, property connected to a violation of gambling laws, such as section 849.0931, is not per se “used, in violation of’ the FCFA (§§ 932.701-932.706, Fla. Stat.). Section 932.703(l)(a), Florida Statutes, provides for forfeiture only of property “used in violation of’ the FCFA or “by means of which any violation of’ the FCFA takes place....

...Accordingly, a showing of probable cause that the owners of the bank accounts in question may have violated the bingo regulations in section 849.0931, Florida Statutes does not automatically establish that the accounts are “contraband” as defined by the FCFA, subject to forfeiture under section 932.703, Florida Statutes....

...money is now gone, this is not moot. The FCFA provides that upon seizure of contraband, “[a]ll rights to, interest in, and title to contraband articles used in violation of s.932.702 shall immediately vest in the seizing law enforcement agency.” § 932.703(l)(c), Fla. Stat. Additionally, the court can “order the forfeiture of any other property of a claimant ... up to the value of any property subject to forfeiture” if any of the property “[cjannot be located.” § 932.703(5)(a), Fla....

...To prevail in an action for malicious prosecution, the claimant must prove that there was an absence of probable cause to initiate proceedings. Burns v. GCC Beverages, Inc., 502 So.2d 1217, 1218 (Fla.1986). Here, Wheeler conceded that respondents had probable cause to seize her car as contraband under section 932.703....

...hearing. Factual Background In July 2013, West Palm Beach police officers seized $11,165.00 in U.S. currency from Sanchez pursuant to the Act on the belief the money had been acquired from illegal gambling. As provided by section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2013), Sanchez requested the trial court conduct an adversarial preliminary hearing. The trial court held a hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(c), for the purpose of determining whether there was probable cause to believe the currency had been or was being used in violation of the Act....

...Under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, real or personal property “used in violation of any provision of the [Act,] or in, upon, or by means of which any violation of the [Act] has taken or is taking place,” may be seized and ultimately forfeited through civil proceedings. § 932.703(1)(a), Fla. Stat....

...which “‘the court or jury determines whether the subject property shall be forfeited.’” Velez v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Police Dep’t, 934 So. 2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 2006) (quoting § 932.701(2)(g), Fla. Stat. (2002)). While now codified by sections 932.703 and 932.704, Florida Statutes (2013), this two-step approach to forfeiture proceedings has its origins in Department of Law Enforcement v....

...procedure. Prior to the Real Property decision, the abovementioned seizure and forfeiture stages were truncated into a single proceeding, initiated either by the State within 90 days of the seizure or by the claimant in an action to recover the property. § 932.703(1), 932.704(1), Fla....

...enumerated category “has the right to litigate the issue of probable cause at an adversarial preliminary hearing.” Chuck v. City of Homestead Police Dep’t, 888 So. 2d 736, 745 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (emphasis added). With regard to the evidence to be presented at the hearing, section 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2013), provides: When an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the court shall review the verified affidavit and any other supporting documents and take any testimony to determine whether...

...Contraband Forfeiture Act. The focus of this statute is on the evidence of probable cause that exists at the time of the adversarial preliminary hearing, not just what the police officers knew at the time the property was seized. The wording of section 932.703(2)(c) compels the conclusion that, unlike a Fourth Amendment challenge, the pertinent inquiry at the adversarial preliminary hearing is “whether there ‘is’ probable cause to believe that a violation of the Act occurred or is occ...

...l. We note that “establishing the owner’s actual or constructive knowledge”— i.e., whether the owner knew the property was being used in an illegal manner—is not required until the forfeiture trial. Gomez, 41 So. 3d at 181. Because the section 932.703(2)(c) probable cause inquiry focuses on the evidence that exists at the time of the hearing, it makes no constitutional or statutory sense to force the “opposing” party at an “adversarial” hearing to remain mute when in posses...

...This is distinct from the issue of the claimant’s knowledge, which relates to the seizing agency’s required showing at the forfeiture stage “that the [claimant] either knew, or should have known after a reasonable inquiry, that the property was being employed or was likely to be employed in criminal activity.” § 932.703(6)(a), Fla....

...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). If the court finds probable cause, it authorizes the seizure or continued seizure of the property. § 932.703(2)(c), (d)....

...§ 932.701(2)(a)(1). After the seizure of personal property, the seizing agency must provide notice of the right to an adversarial preliminary hearing, and a defined class of persons entitled to notice has a specified time to request such a hearing. § 932.703(2)(a). If requested, the hearing must be held in short order, and the court must determine *1041 whether the seizing agency proves probable cause for forfeiture by reviewing the agency's verified affidavit, supporting documents, and testimony. § 932.703(2)(c)....

...employed in criminal activity. If a lienholder's interest is not subject to forfeiture under the requirements of this section, such interest shall be preserved by the court by ordering the lienholder's interest to be paid as provided in s. 932.7055. § 932.703(6)(b), Fla....

...Boothe, of Dennis E. Boothe, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant. No appearance for Appellee. HAWKES, J. The facts of this forfeiture action are not contested. The Jefferson County Sheriff's Department seized $30,180.00 from Appellant, Tony Murphy, pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2000) (the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act), during a traffic stop....

...rse. Florida law is clear. Once a post-seizure adversarial hearing is requested, the seizing agency must set and notice the hearing, and the hearing must be held within ten days after the request is received or as soon as practicable thereafter. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla....

...By the same reasoning, and by clear import of the statute, there is no impediment to the exercise of jurisdiction by the criminal division of the circuit court, to make a preliminary probable cause determination, prior to the filing of the rule to show cause which initiates the civil forfeiture proceedings. § 932.703, Fla....

...An adversarial preliminary hearing conducted in furtherance of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act requires the court to make a determination as to wheth *597 er sufficient probable cause exists to sustain the forfeiture proceeding in question. The plain language of section 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes, mandates, in pertinent part: When an adversarial preliminary hearing is held, the court shall ... determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the property was used, is being used, was attempted to be used, or was intended to be used in violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. § 932.703(2)(e), Fla....

...carry, convey or conceal any contraband article. "All rights and interest in and title to contraband articles or contraband property used in violation of s. 932.702 [sic] shall immediately vest in the state upon seizure by a law enforcement agency." § 932.703(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). Section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that no action for "replevin nor any other action to recover any interest in such property shall be maintained in any court, except as provided in this act; however, such action may be maintained...

...ction 932.701(2)(a)9. controls over the general forfeiture provision contained in section 932.701(2)(a)5. The court erred in so ruling. The Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act provides that contraband articles shall be seized and forfeited as follows: 932.703 Forfeiture of contraband article; exceptions.—(1)(a) Any contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real estate used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, . . . may be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. § 932.703(1)(a), Fla....

requested an adversarial preliminary hearing under section 932.703(2)(a) of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture

to forfeiture only when it becomes contraband, § 932.703, Fla. Stat. (1983), as defined in section 932

the failure to promptly proceed appears in section 932.703(3), which provides: Neither replevin nor any

lacked standing to contest the forfeiture. Section 932.-703(2), Florida Statutes (1985), confers standing

adversarial preliminary hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2015). 1 Hudson refused

tide of drug activity the Legislature passed Section 932.703(1), which provides: Any vessel, motor vehicle

been used in violation of the Act. We affirm. Section 932.703(2)(c) provides in relevant part as follows:

transport any contraband article upon any vessel. Section 932.703(1) allows for the forfeiture of any vessel

subsection 932.703(l)(c), Florida Statutes. See also § 932.703(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (1997). Gay ‘s motion did not

in pertinent part: A., in Florida Statute Section 932.703(1) (1989) that, All rights and interest in

property may be seized for a violation of the Act. § 932.703(l)(a). Following a seizure, the person whose property

the vehicle was used to transport heroin. Section 932.703(4) provides as follows: In any incident

intended to be used” in violation of the FCFA. § 932.703(2)(c), Fla. Stat. If the court determines that

course *366 of grand theft. He suggests that section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1981), is the enabling

on the statutory presumption set forth in section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1987), with the burden

contraband may be seized and ultimately forfeited. § 932.703(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Following the seizure of

adversarial probable cause hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2009). On November

forfeiture. Contrary to the dissent, I do not read section 932.703(1)(c) as limiting the seizure of contraband

requires forfeiture of the vehicle pursuant to Section 932.703, Florida Statutes.3 *901In State v. Crenshaw

named items to the forfeiture provisions of section 932.-703, Florida Statutes (1987). On February 22,

was likely to be employed in criminal activity, § 932.703(2), Fla.Stat. (1989). In a forfeiture action,

subjects that contraband to permanent forfeiture. § 932.703(l)(a), Fla. Stat. The statute defines contraband

conceal or possess any contraband article. Section 932.703 then deals with the seizure and forfeiture

5th DCA 1983) (“lien rights preserved by section 932.703 should include and encompass attorney’s fees

immediately vested in the state upon its seizure. § 932.703(1), Fla.Stat. (1981). Nevertheless, the statute

adversarial preliminary hearing, pursuant to section 932.703(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1995).1 Over the defense’s

appeal by the City of Ormond Beach followed. Section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1989) governs the procedure

Christopher was the de facto owner of the car. Section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes, provides that “[n]o property

burglary. Forfeiture was thus appropriate under section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1981) unless Fitz-simmons

the date of seizure" (emphasis added). In section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1987), the legislature

fees as part of the Bank’s lien. We affirm. Section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1981), provides “[no]

Pontiac pursuant to Florida’s forfeiture statute § 932.703 and conduct a subsequent search. See also, Cooper

preliminary adversary hearing pursuant to section 932.703(2)(c). That section directs the trial court

(1981).1 The vehicle was seized pursuant to Section 932.703(1),2 and the state instituted forfeiture proceedings

paraphernalia.1 The parties do not dispute that section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1989), applies in this case

Peters, 401 So.2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). Section 932.703(1), which became effective July 1, 1980, provides:

vehicle cannot be subject to forfeiture. Cf. § 932.703(2), Fla. Stat. (1985).[2] *1392 This line of cases

had not complied with the requirements of section 932.703 for timely notification and filing of a complaint

Unlimited, Inc. is protected from forfeiture by section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes, because the corporate

insufficient to protect her interest from forfeiture. Section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1989), provides as follows:

likely to be employed in criminal activity.” § 932.703, Fla.Stat. (1981). A case arose where a husband

by the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, section 932.703 et seq., Florida Statutes, were conducted

Wheels Unlimited, Inc. is not controlling. Section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1985) specifically distinguishes

Ed.2d 361 (1984), a forfeiture pursuant to section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1995), could constitute

forfeiture, is irrelevant, we reverse. Although section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1989) only permits forfeiture

abetting in the commission of, any felony." Section 932.703(1), F.S., relevant to your inquiry, provides

request an adversarial preliminary hearing. See id. § 932.703(2)(a). Counsel for the claimants sent a written

owner” at the time the truck was seized. See § 932.703(6)(A), Fla. Stat. (2006). We therefore reverse

or giving away of any contraband article. Section 932.703(1) provides for forfeiture of any motor vehicle

or giving away of any contraband article. Section 932.703(1), F.S., provides, in part, that: Any

personal property with contraband proceeds. Section 932.703(1)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that any

as practicable thereafter, as required by section 932.703(2)(a), Fla.Stat. See generally Cochran v. Harris

claimant to repossession of the item. See section 932.703(2)-(3), Florida Statutes (1981); see also United

according to appellant, sua sponte declared section 932.-703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), unconstitutional

interest were properly protected and under section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1983), had priority over

the complaint to 60 days. She relied upon section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1997) which says: (3)

seizure and claim for forfeiture as required by section 932.703(3)(a).2 Appellee moved to dismiss the

the crime of carrying a concealed weapon. Section 932.703(1) provides for forfeiture of a motor vehicle

for hearing with the circuit court. Under section 932.703(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), an adversarial

discovered in his wallet at the crime scene. See § 932.703(2)(a). Attached to his motion was the arrest affidavit

protection, but only under certain circumstances. Section 932.703(3), Florida Statutes (1985), provides: (3)

significantly involved in criminal enterprises, section 932.703, Florida Statutes, authorizing forfeitures

As the City correctly contends, pursuant to section 932.703(1), Florida Statute (1989), the trial court

to the “innocent owner” defense created by section 932.703(6)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). That section

(holding that the forty-five-day limit in section 932.703(3) to file forfeiture complaint was not jurisdictional

cash and maintain the forfeiture action. See § 932.703(2), Fla. Stat. (2009). Mos-towicz responded by

abetting in the commission of, any felony. 22 Section 932.703(1), F.S. 23 Goddard v. State, 438 So.2d 110

does on appeal, that the following portion of Section 932.703(1) is controlling: (1) * * * In any incident

to have Guy Freeman’s car forfeited under section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1987), after Deputy Livingston

interest is not subject to the protection of section 932.-703(2), Florida Statutes (1985). Affirmed. LEHAN

the property as “monetary instruments” under section 932.703(1)(a)5. and “contraband articles” under sections

Miami Beach, 440 So.2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); § 932.703(3), Fla.Stat. (1983).

was likely to be used, in a criminal activity. § 932.-703(2), Fla.Stat. (1983); Wheeler v. State, 472 So

but the police did seize the car pursuant to Section 932.703, Florida Statutes (1983), and “it is a reasonable

the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. 14 Section 932.703(1)(c), F.S. (1992 Supp.). This subparagraph

or giving away of any contraband article. Section 932.703(1), F.S., provides that any vessel, motor vehicle

likely to be employed in criminal activity. See § 932.703(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (1993). Reversed. FRANK and

purchase drugs to a perfected drug purchase. Section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1989), provides for forfeiture

sought to prevent forfeiture by invoking section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (1985). To prevail under

(Fla. 2010)). The first stage, outlined in section 932.703(2), Florida Statutes (2015), involves the seizure

adversarial preliminary hearing. See § 932.703(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2011) (confirming that a person

FLORIDA CONTRABAND FORFEITURE ACT) Under section 932.703(l)(a), “[a]ny contraband article, vessel, motor

or giving away of any contraband article. Section 932.703(1), in relevant part, provides: `Any vessel

to operate the aircraft. AS TO QUESTION 1: Section 932.703, F.S. 1981 (former s. 943.43, F.S.), authorizes

contraband may be seized and ultimately forfeited. § 932.703(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). Following the seizure of

the violation or subsequent to the violation. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006). There is no requirement

Laws of Florida. 3 See, s. 932.703(1), F.S. 4 Section 932.703(1)(c), F.S., as amended by s. 3, Ch. 92-54

note that the legislature recently amended section 932.703(l)(d)(2) of the Act to provide, among other

receiving notice that the hearing be held. § 932.703(2)(a), Fla. Stat. The Act defines “person

of s. 322.34(9)(a)." 22 Section 932.703(1)(a), Fla. Stat. 23 Section 932.703(1)(c), Fla. Stat. 24 Section

support its continued seizure. See generally § 932.703(3)(a), (3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2022); Golon v. Jenne

violation of the provisions of this act. Further, section 932.703(2) provides: No property shall be forfeited

(Fla. 2d DCA 1981). The legislature amended section 932.703(1), formerly section 943.43(1), in 1980. The

driver’s license made her an innocent owner under section 932.703(6)(A), Florida Statutes,3 which pro*936vides

contraband subject to seizure and forfeiture under section 932.703(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1999).1 However, section

the “innocent spouse” exception contained in section 932.-703(2), Florida Statutes (1989), rendered the

any provision of s 932.-702” shall be seized. § 932.703, Fla.Stat. (1981). We have carefully reviewed

deny the forfeiture, and therefore, reverse. Section 932.703(1), Florida Statutes (1983), provides in pertinent