MASTAKOSKI v. 2003 DODGE DURANGO

No. A06-2396.

738 N.W.2d 411 (2007)

Chad Scott MASTAKOSKI, Appellant, v. 2003 DODGE DURANGO, VIN # 1D8HS78Z13F530764, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

September 11, 2007.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rachel C. Delich-Sullivan, Hibbing, MN, for appellant.

Melanie S. Ford, St. Louis County Attorney, Thomas G. Stanley, Assistant County Attorney, Duluth, MN, for respondent.

Considered and decided by WILLIS, Presiding Judge; RANDALL, Judge; and ROSS, Judge.


OPINION

WILLIS, Judge.

Appellant challenges the forfeiture of his vehicle, arguing that because he was not convicted of the designated offense on which the forfeiture was based, the forfeiture was unlawful. Because we conclude that a vehicle is subject to forfeiture under the vehicle-forfeiture statute if it was used in the commission of a designated offense, even if the driver was not convicted of that offense, and because here it is undisputed that appellant...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases