SC04-1944 - Walter Velez v. Miami-Dade County Police Department

State: Florida

Docket No: SC04-1944

Case Date: 02/16/2006

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
____________ No. SC04-1944 ____________ WALTER VELEZ, Petitioner, vs. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Respondent. [June 22, 2006] REVISED OPINION BELL, J. This case concerns the breadth of the class of persons that have standing to contest probable cause at a postseizure, adversarial probable cause hearing under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act.1 We review Velez v. Miami-Dade County Police Department, 881 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004), in which the Third District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the decisions of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in City of Fort Lauderdale v. Baruch, 718 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 4th

1. Hereinafter "Forfeiture Act." The Forfeiture Act spans sections 932.701.707, Florida Statutes (2002).

DCA 1998), and Jean-Louis v. Forfeiture of $203,595.00 in U.S. Currency, 767 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).2 In addition to certifying conflict, the Third District specified the conflict issue as follows: DOES A PERSON IN MERE POSSESSION OF PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF SEIZURE HAVE STANDING AT AN ADVERSARIAL PRELIMINARY HEARING TO CHALLENGE THE SEIZURE WITHOUT SHOWING A PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY? Velez, 881 So. 2d at 1192. The Third District answers this question in the negative. The Fourth District answers it in the affirmative. We approve the decisions of the Fourth District in Baruch and Jean-Louis. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the Forfeiture Act gives a person in possession of the property at the time of seizure standing to participate in the adversarial preliminary hearing without showing a proprietary interest in the property. In light of this resolution, we quash the decision of the Third District in Velez and remand to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY A Miami-Dade police officer stopped Velez for a traffic infraction. The officer asked Velez about a suitcase in plain view on the rear seat of the vehicle. Velez said the suitcase contained only clothing and gave consent for a search. The

2. We have jurisdiction. See art. V,

Download SC04-1944 - Walter Velez v. Miami-Dade County Police Department.pdf