State v. Ninety Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars & No Cents in United States Currency ($90,235)
390 S.W.3d 289
| Tex. | 2013Background
- On May 6, 2008, Deputy Gomez stopped a black Lincoln Navigator driven by Bueno; proof of insurer and license were provided.
- A K-9 unit alerted to narcotics on the exterior; bags of cash totaling $90,235 were found inside the backpack and tote bag.
- The money and vehicle were seized, and the State filed forfeiture proceedings alleging contraband under Texas statutory provisions.
- Bueno answered, claimed ownership, and moved for traditional summary judgment on three grounds: lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, no probable cause, and illegal search.
- The trial court granted the motion without stated reasons; the court of appeals affirmed on the probable-cause ground.
- The supreme court reversed the appellate court’s affirmance on probable cause and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause to seize the property | Bueno contends no reasonable belief of substantial nexus existed. | Bueno argues there was no probable cause to seize the cash as contraband. | Probable cause exists; genuine issue of material fact remained unresolved for summary judgment. |
| Search legality as basis for forfeiture | State asserts seizure was lawfully incident to a search within stop scope. | Bueno asserts warrantless search exceeded stop’s temporal scope. | Not addressed on appeal; case remanded for further proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. $11,014.00, 820 S.W.2d 783 (Tex.1991) (probable cause standard in forfeiture proceedings)
- $56,700 in U.S. Currency v. State, 730 S.W.2d 659 (Tex.1987) (forfeiture burden and probable cause standards)
- United States v. $364,960.00 in U.S. Currency, 661 F.2d 319 (5th Cir.1981) (requisite substantial connection for forfeiture)
- Exxon Corp. v. Emerald Oil & Gas Co., L.C., 331 S.W.3d 419 (Tex.2010) (de novo review of summary judgment; burden-shifting standards)
- Mann Frankfort Stein & Lipp Advisors, Inc. v. Fielding, 289 S.W.3d 844 (Tex.2009) (burden to show no genuine issue of material fact on motion for summary judgment)
- M.D. Anderson Hosp. & Tumor Inst. v. Willrich, 28 S.W.3d 22 (Tex.2000) (summary judgment evidence from an interested witness considerations)
- FM Props. Operating Co. v. City of Austin, 22 S.W.3d 868 (Tex.2000) (standard for granting traditional summary judgment)