Opinion ID: 1891743
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Application of Law of Preemption to the FCFA and the Ordinance

Text: Contrary to the Fourth District's findings, the words shall utilize alone do not express preemption. This phrase should be read in context and with an eye toward its plain meaning. We have recognized as `axiomatic' the principle that `all parts of a statute must be read together in order to achieve a consistent whole.' When possible, we `must give full effect to all statutory provisions and construe related statutory provisions in harmony with one another.' Clines v. State, 912 So.2d 550, 557 (Fla.2005) (citation omitted) (quoting Forsythe v. Longboat Key Beach Erosion Control Dist., 604 So.2d 452, 455 (Fla. 1992)). In section 932.704(1), the Legislature provides that [i]t is the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies shall utilize the provisions of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act to deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles for criminal purposes. The term contraband is a defined term under the FCFA. In pertinent part, the FCFA defines contraband as [a]ny personal property, including . . . any . . . vehicle of any kind . . . which was used or was attempted to be used as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of, any felony, whether or not comprising an element of the felony .... § 932.701(2)(a)(5), Fla. Stat. (2002) (emphasis added). When this statutory definition of contraband is placed in the FCFA's policy statement, that statement reads as follows: It is the policy of this state that law enforcement agencies shall utilize the provisions of the [FCFA] to deter and prevent the continued use of contraband articles [i.e., any personal property, including... any ... vehicle of any kind... which was used or was attempted to be used as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of, any felony, whether or not comprising an element of the felony] for criminal purposes. §§ 932.701(2)(a)(5), .704(1), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). Read in this manner, the FCFA's policy statement refers to contraband articles, such as vehicles, as those articles that are connected with the commission of felony offenses. Stated otherwise, for purposes of preemption, when the statutory definition of contraband is applied to the policy statement in section 932.704(1), the FCFA does not express any intent to preempt seizure and forfeiture in the context of nonfelony offenses. [5] Furthermore, when the FCFA and the question of preemption are considered in light of the Municipal Home Rule Powers Act, the absence of an express legislative intent to preempt the field of forfeiture in enacting the FCFA becomes more significant. As of 1941, the law in Florida was that the subject of forfeiture is a field preempted to the Legislature, and a municipality had to expressly be given the authority to legislate in that field. City of Miami v. Miller, 148 Fla. 349, 4 So.2d 369, 370 (1941). [6] However, a change in this law occurred in 1973 when the Municipal Home Rule Powers Act was enacted. This act removed all general limitations on a municipality's power to legislate in a particular field. See § 166.021, Fla. Stat. (2002). Passed the year before the original version of the FCFA, the Municipal Home Rule Powers Act does not reserve to the Legislature the power to legislate in the field of forfeiture. One cannot lightly disregard this omission because the Legislature did retain field preemption in other areas. For example, in chapter 166 itself, the Legislature preempted the field in regard to ammunition sales. See § 166.044, Fla. Stat. (2002) (No municipality may adopt any ordinance relating to the possession or sale of ammunition.). And since 1973, the Legislature has continued to use similar preemptive language in other contexts. For instance, regarding the lottery, the Legislature stated that [a]ll matters relating to the operation of the state lottery are preempted to the state, and no county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state shall enact any ordinance relating to the operation of the lottery authorized by this act. § 24.122(3), Fla. Stat. (2005); see also § 320.8249(11), Fla. Stat. (2005) (The regulation of manufactured homes installers or mobile home installers is preempted to the state....). Given the forgoing analysis, we determine that the FCFA does not preempt to the Legislature the field of vehicle seizure and forfeiture, much less impoundment, for misdemeanor offenses. Accordingly, in answering the certified question as rephrased, we hold that the FCFA does not preempt a municipality from adopting an ordinance that authorizes the seizure and impoundment of vehicles used in the commission of certain misdemeanors.