
    In re The FORFEITURE OF ONE 1986 PONTIAC TRANS-AM AUTOMOBILE, VIN 1G2FW87H8GN235105.
    No. 90-2412.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    June 5, 1991.
    James L. Eisenberg, West Palm Beach, for appellant-Judith Gopoian.
    Peter A. Sachs and Mark B. Kleinfeld of Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee-Town of Palm Beach.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant was stopped for speeding and subsequently arrested for possession of cocaine. The total quantity involved was about one-half dozen small baggies.

Appellant pled guilty to attempted possession, a misdemeanor; and the Town of Palm Beach instituted forfeiture proceedings against appellant’s Pontiac Trans-Am Automobile, valued at about $6,000. The trial court entered a final order of forfeiture in favor of the Town, occasioning this appeal.

In ordering the forfeiture, the trial court considered and rejected appellant’s contentions that the forfeiture constituted double jeopardy; and that United States v. Hal-per, 490 U.S. 435, 109 S.Ct. 1892, 104 L.Ed.2d 487 (1989), was controlling. It based its order upon the 4-3 decision of our supreme court in State v. Crenshaw, 548 So.2d 223 (Fla.1989). We agree with the trial court and affirm. See also United States v. A Parcel of Land, 884 F.2d 41 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. One Assortment of 89 Firearms, 465 U.S. 354,104 S.Ct. 1099, 79 L.Ed.2d 361 (1984).

GLICKSTEIN, GUNTHER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.  