Grubb v. City of Sebring

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Grubb v. City of Sebring

518 So. 2d 463, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 217, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 114, 1988 WL 1474

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 15, 1988

DocketNo. 87-1381

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 518 So. 2d 463 (Grubb v. City of Sebring) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Grubb v. City of Sebring, 518 So. 2d 463, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 217, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 114, 1988 WL 1474 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.

In this appeal appellants challenge the forfeiture of a vehicle titled in the name of appellant Barbara Grubb and operated by appellant Jay Grubb when he struck and killed a pedestrian. The petition for forfeiture of the vehicle pursuant to sections 932.701 through 932.704, Florida Statutes (1985) alleged that the vehicle was used or intended to be used in violation of section 782.071, Florida Statutes, Vehicular Homicide. The final judgment and final order of forfeiture finds that the vehicle “was used in the commission of vehicular homicide, a felony of the third degree.” Appellants raise three issues on this appeal. We agree with the first issue and reverse on that basis. We do not find it necessary to reach or decide the other issues. Appellants in their first issue argue that the vehicle was not subject to forfeiture because use of a vehicle is an “element” of the offense of vehicular homicide and, therefore, cannot be considered as an “instrumentality” of the offense as required by section 932.701(2)(e). We agree. See In re Forfeiture of One 1968 Cessna 310, Serial No. 0037, Registration No. 41370: Heinrich v. Madden, 496 So.2d 995 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); City of St. Petersburg Beach v. Jewell, 489 So.2d 78 (Fla.2d DCA 1986); In re Forfeiture of 1979 Mercedes, 4-Door, VIN No. 11603312085778, Tag No. WHJ 371, 484 So.2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Cabrera v. Department of Natural Resources, 478 So.2d 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); City of Indian Harbour Beach v. Damron, 465 So.2d 1382 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).

The judgment of forfeiture is reversed and this cause remanded for treatment consistent herewith.

FRANK and HALL, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.

In this appeal appellants challenge the forfeiture of a vehicle titled in the name of appellant Barbara Grubb and operated by appellant Jay Grubb when he struck and killed a pedestrian. The petition for forfeiture of the vehicle pursuant to sections 932.701 through 932.704, Florida Statutes (1985) alleged that the vehicle was used or intended to be used in violation of section 782.071, Florida Statutes, Vehicular Homicide. The final judgment and final order of forfeiture finds that the vehicle “was used in the commission of vehicular homicide, a felony of the third degree.” Appellants raise three issues on this appeal. We agree with the first issue and reverse on that basis. We do not find it necessary to reach or decide the other issues. Appellants in their first issue argue that the vehicle was not subject to forfeiture because use of a vehicle is an “element” of the offense of vehicular homicide and, therefore, cannot be considered as an “instrumentality” of the offense as required by section 932.701(2)(e). We agree. See In re Forfeiture of One 1968 Cessna 310, Serial No. 0037, Registration No. 41370: Heinrich v. Madden, 496 So.2d 995 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); City of St. Petersburg Beach v. Jewell, 489 So.2d 78 (Fla.2d DCA 1986); In re Forfeiture of 1979 Mercedes, 4-Door, VIN No. 11603312085778, Tag No. WHJ 371, 484 So.2d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Cabrera v. Department of Natural Resources, 478 So.2d 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); City of Indian Harbour Beach v. Damron, 465 So.2d 1382 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).

The judgment of forfeiture is reversed and this cause remanded for treatment consistent herewith.

FRANK and HALL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

518 So. 2d 463, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 217, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 114, 1988 WL 1474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grubb-v-city-of-sebring-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack