816 So. 2d 826 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · May 22, 2002
Full text
Sarmiento v. State
816 So.2d 826 (2002)
Nelson SARMIENTO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 3D98-3256.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 22, 2002.
Nelson Sarmiento, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, and Jan E. Vair, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before GREEN and RAMIREZ, JJ. and NESBITT, Senior Judge.
*827 PER CURIAM.
We affirm the order denying the appellant's petition for the return of his property seized during his arrest where, as here, the petition was not timely filed within sixty (60) days after the conclusion of the criminal proceeding as is required by section 705.105(1), Fla. Stat. (1997); see Romero-Saavedra v. State, 735 So.2d 1290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) and Crutchley v. Brevard County Sheriffs Office, 688 So.2d 371 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); and where civil forfeiture proceedings against the property were pending at the time of the filing of the petition. See City of Miami v. Barclay, 563 So.2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (owner not entitled to return of property during pendency of forfeiture proceedings even in the absence of formal charges against owner); City of Coral Gables v. Rodriguez, 568 So.2d 1302 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).
Affirmed.
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 23, 2007
Parentheticals
affirming an order denying a defendant's petition for the return of his property where the petition was not filed within sixty days after the conclusion of the criminal proceeding
affirming order denying a defendant’s petition for the return of his property where the defendant did not file his petition within sixty days of his criminal proceeding’s conclusion as section 705.105(1) requires
denial of petition for return of property was affirmed “where civil forfeiture proceedings against the property were pending at the time of the filing of the petition”