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.
The husband was arrested for soliciting prostitution.
The wife was not arrested, was not present at the time of the arrest, and did not know that her husband was soliciting prostitutes.
The wife had to pay $1000 plus towing fees plus storage fees to retrieve her car, since she was the car owner.
In the first case filed by appellees, law enforcement impounded Danielle Wellman’s vehicle pursuant to the City’s ordinances after they arrested her husband, Sidney Wellman, for having operated the vehicle to solicit prostitution. The Wellmans then brought a class action suit against the City for a declaratory judgment to find that the ordinances were invalid, for injunctive relief, and for unjust enrichment.
But, but it's only for mafia crime lords and drug kingpins like Pablo Escovar! You don't like mafia crime lords and drug kingpins, do you??? Besides, it's For The Children(tm)! I think you must be a libertine. Only a crack smoking pagan would say such things. /s
Your rights don't apply if they are doing this in line with the other forfeiture laws. The case is technically against the property, which has no civil rights, and not against the person. Cases list like "People vs. 1996 Ford Bronco" or "People vs. $10,000."
"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".
Can you say VIAGRA?
I am deeply saddened....
Can you say VIAGRA?
I noticed that too, but I was trying to keep my comments on the PG level :-)
Ah yes, the 'fine print' of the Constitution where tortured 'logic' and legal backflips explain away the rights so clearly enumerated in plain English.
My theory of whey they even bother with such pathetic, thinly veiled feats of legalese is if they didn't and came right out in a rare moment of candidness and said "We simply don't care what the Constitution says", the legitimacy of their rule would be widely questioned, since the Constitution is the document that created their office to begin with.
So they'll pretend they are still bound by the Constitution, and we'll pretend this is a free country.
So is the car accused of soliciting the prostitute?
The car was accessory to solicitation.
Bad, naughty car.
I understand the article -- I'm just asking if this is any better, from a practical standpoint.
Now the guy will be arrested for soliciting prostitution, he goes to jail, makes bail. He has to go to court (tying up the judge, the courtroom, the prosector, the cop, etc.), he pays a fine, court costs, it goes on his record.
All this so george wythe can dot the i's and cross the t's in the legal system?
You're right. Why should the legal system of all things obey laws, especially such a worthless one as the 5th Amendment? The ends justify the means after all. And if an innocent man pays $1000, we'll just remember we have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.
He has to go to court (tying up the judge, the courtroom, the prosector, the cop, etc.
If they want to shovel out the ocean, they should expect their backs to get sore and a few blisters on their hands.
The car is accused of being used in a crime.
The $1000 fine was applied to Danielle, the owner of the car.
Whether her husband Sydney was convicted of solicitation and fined, given probation, or jail time will have no effect in the impounding of her vehicle.
Cops got probable cause, vehicle impounded, owner must pay the impounding fee.
The perp driving the car still has to go to court and pay all the legal penalties for his solicitation charge.
I posted a link to the opinion in case you want to know the facts.
Must've been an SUV. :^)
Florida’s Municipal Home Rule Powers Act states that cities may not legislate in an area expressly preempted by state legislation.
Interesting side note: The City of Miami pulled the exact same stunt with a gun "safe storage law". The City officials abviously know about the MHRPA, but simply don't care. They were slapped down on that one, and again here.
You mean, like these fellows?
A Miami police officer has been arrested and accused of pocketing money found during a drug raid.Officer Raynard Gilbert is charged with grand theft and tampering with evidence after an internal affairs investigation found that he stole $700 during a May drug bust.
Gilbert has been a Miami cop for 15 years and he's not the only officer in trouble with the law.
Officer Angel Rodriguez was let go from the force after he allegedly tried to solicit sex from a prisoner he picked up on a traffic stop. Rodriguez was fired but not arrested.
You are wrong. It will simply be another victimless crime that will be rarely prosecuted because there is no longer profit in it for the city. These confiscations were a profit center for the city. Once it starts costing them money, you'll find them to be a lot less enthusiastic in their enforcement.
No. The law never applies to the overlords. Only peasants need worry about laws.
But a few years from now you'll be bitching and moaning about how the courts are all clogged up with these obvious open and shut cases and why can't the cops just issue some kind of civil penalty and why must this kind of thing go on one's record, and waaa waaa waaa.
You'll never be happy.
The prosecutor can charge you or not, entirely independent of whether your car is seized. And even if you're acquitted, that's no guarantee of getting your property back.
As I'm sure you've read here, the 'legal' (and I use the term loosly) basis of this confiscation is the car itself is an accessory to the crime. (bad car!), therefore you have no 5th Amendment right to due process for your property. Any comments on that?
Toss a cigarette butt out a window and lose your car?
So this upsets you? What about people being arrested, having their freedom taken away, and being thrown in jail until a trial is scheduled? Isn't that worse? Happens all the time.
The car was part of the crime -- if the guy were walking down the street and solicited a prostitute he wouldn't have his car seized. And that's another thing. The car is held, pending disposition of the case. The state of Florida doesn't take possession without due process. Ease up.
But you don't want this to be a civil matter anymore. Well, looks like you'll get your wish. Now the guy will have to go through a hassle, get a lawyer, go to court, pay a fine (and I hope to God it's at least $1000.), pay court costs, and now it goes on his record. Oh goody.
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.