Posted on 02/05/2004 11:24:12 AM PST by george wythe
The city of Miami made a quick $1,000 when it arrested 79-year-old Sidney Wellman on a charge of propositioning a prostitute on Biscayne Boulevard four years ago.
That fine -- paid by Wellman to retrieve a confiscated car -- may soon prove costly to the city.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeal on Wednesday upheld a lower court's ruling that a 1997 Miami ordinance allowing police officers to confiscate vehicles of drivers committing crimes -- particularly buying drugs or soliciting prostitutes -- is invalid.
Circuit Court Judge Celeste Muir ruled in 2001 that the city could not impound a vehicle unless the driver is the sole owner.
Under the city law, drivers had to pay $1,000 in civil penalties to get their vehicles back. Those who couldn't come up with the money lost their vehicles, and the city eventually profited through their sale.
In a 16-page order, the appeals court agreed with the circuit court that in order for the city to confiscate the vehicle, the person driving the car must own it.
Between 1997 and 2001, more than 10,500 vehicles were impounded, and Miami collected almost $8.7 million. Wellman, who proved that the car was owned by his wife, paid the fine to retrieve the vehicle, then sued. He was never convicted of a crime.
Miami could petition for a rehearing or appeal. City Attorney Alejandro Vilarello could not be reached for comment on Wednesday.
You would also think being quilty of a real crime might be a requirement....
Anyone know, can a car be "owned" by a minor?
The City of Miami enacted an ordinance which allows the police to seize and impound any motor vehicle that the police have probable cause to believe has been used to facilitate crimes that were a threat to the health, safety and welfare of the City.The ordinance allows impoundment of a vehicle where the vehicle contained a controlled substance; had been used for the sale or purchase of a controlled substance; had been used to facilitate the commission of an act of prostitution, assignation, or lewdness; or had been used for the illegal dumping of litter or hazardous waste.
The police officer is then required to notify, in writing, the person determined to be the owner of the vehicle and any person found to be in control of the vehicle at the time of the seizure and impoundment.
The officer is also required to advise the vehicle owner or the person in control of the vehicle of their right to request a preliminary hearing or to recover their vehicle upon payment of a $1,000 administrative civil penalty, plus towing and storage charges.
Lewdness and littering? Why not just seize every car speeding or not using a turn signal or using a cell phone.
It would seem that car rental agencies have a stronger lobby in Miami than Sacramento.
Quoting Navin Johnson in the Jerk..."Oh, it's a profit deal!"
Not that it matters anymore...
Amendment V: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
Probable cause IS NOT due process. Due process requires a trial and a conviction.
But who cares, what's one more gaping hole in the Bill of Rights matter... just throw another log on the fire.
Unfortunately, this is a very narrow ruling.
The only reason that City of Miami ordinance was struck down is because it contradicts a state statute.
It the Florida statute is changed by the Florida legislature, then the City of Miami is free to reinstitute this abusive ordinance.
In the appellate courts words:
We agree with the owners that the Forfeiture Act preempts the City’s ordinance.Florida’s Municipal Home Rule Powers Act states that cities may not legislate in an area expressly preempted by state legislation.
It would seem so. As I recall in the case here in Sacramento, it was the girlfriends or possibly wifes car. It has been at least 10 years ago that this happened, back when this whole conficating property started.
Just give it time.
My guess is that from this point forward, you'll get your wish. Instead of paying a fine the person will now be charged with soliciting prostitution, will be arrested, thrown in jail, and they'll have to make bail. Then they'll have to go to court, etc.
Yeah, I guess charging them is better.
*yes, with my money
Well it is if you are inncocent. What if someone was really just asking for dirctions and had no idea the lady was a prostitute? Police have probably cause and you have a $1,000 fine under those circumstances.
Don't give them ideas; there is no law too intrusive for our elected officials if it makes money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.