so that they could leave the scene undetected. The officer left the room, and the two were arrested. Clearly at the time of the arrest, the defendant and her companion had the right to possession and control of the cocaine and had physically exercised that right. Defendant cites to Garces v. State, 485 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), as supporting her claim that she was not “knowingly in actual or constructive possession” of the drugs at issue. Garces held that the temporary control of contraband in the presence of its actual owner, for the purpose of verifying that it was what it purported to be, did not constitute “legal possession.” However the 1992 amendment to section 893.02(16), Florida negates the possibility of such a claim. See State v. Nellums, 614 So.2d 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (<HOLDING>); see also Ortega v. State, 755 So.2d 813 (Fla.
recognizing that publication in the laws of florida or the florida statutes gives all citizens constructive notice of the consequences of their actions holding florida sexual predators act section 77521 florida statutes 2000 to be unconstitutional as violating procedural due process recognizing that the 1992 amendment to section 8930216 florida statutes changed the law recognizing that as to notice publication in the laws of florida or the florida statutes gives all citizens constructive notice of the consequences of their actions holding that the legislature amended section 8120142d florida statutes now renumbered as section 8120143c in 1992 to omit habitual offender penalties for the crime of felony petit theft