Jenkins v. City of Pensacola

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jenkins v. City of Pensacola

602 So. 2d 988, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8366, 1992 WL 176982

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 29, 1992

DocketNo. 91-2886

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 602 So. 2d 988 (Jenkins v. City of Pensacola) 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

Jenkins v. City of Pensacola, 602 So. 2d 988, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8366, 1992 WL 176982 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

ZEHMER, Judge.

Preach Son Jenkins appeals a final judgment of forfeiture wherein the trial court ruled that jewelry worn by him during a drug sale was subject to forfeiture pursuant to section 932.701, et seq., Florida Statutes (1989), and ordered that it be forfeited to the City of Pensacola. Under the clear and convincing proof standard approved in Department of Law Enforcement v. Real Property, 588 So.2d 957 (Fla.1991), the evidence was legally insufficient to establish a connection between the jewelry and the illegal activity charged, and thus fails to support the trial court’s finding that the jewelry was employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, and aided and abetted in the commission of, the felony of possession of cocaine, sale of cocaine, and possession with the intent to distribute cocaine. The order of forfeiture is reversed and the cause is remanded for entry of an order dismissing the City’s petition.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur.

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

ZEHMER, Judge.

Preach Son Jenkins appeals a final judgment of forfeiture wherein the trial court ruled that jewelry worn by him during a drug sale was subject to forfeiture pursuant to section 932.701, et seq., Florida Statutes (1989), and ordered that it be forfeited to the City of Pensacola. Under the clear and convincing proof standard approved in Department of Law Enforcement v. Real Property, 588 So.2d 957 (Fla.1991), the evidence was legally insufficient to establish a connection between the jewelry and the illegal activity charged, and thus fails to support the trial court’s finding that the jewelry was employed as an instrumentality in the commission of, and aided and abetted in the commission of, the felony of possession of cocaine, sale of cocaine, and possession with the intent to distribute cocaine. The order of forfeiture is reversed and the cause is remanded for entry of an order dismissing the City’s petition.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

602 So. 2d 988, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8366, 1992 WL 176982, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenkins-v-city-of-pensacola-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack