The Tampa Police Department appeals a final judgment denying, the forfeiture of a Dodge Intrepid used to drive to a location where the driver purchased $20 worth of crack cocaine. The trial court found that the forfeiture of the recently purchased $21,-339.00 Dodge would constitute an excessive fine. We affirm.

The complaint for forfeiture alleged that the vehicle was used in violation of section 932.702, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1992), to purchase cocaine. The Supreme Court recently held that the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment applies to forfeitures which are used to exact punishment notwithstanding that the forfeitures are civil and remedial in purpose. See Austin v. United States, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 2801, 125 L.Ed.2d 488 (1993); Alexander v. United States, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 2766, 125 L.Ed.2d 441 (1993). The Court left to the lower courts the choice of criteria to be used in determining whether a forfeiture is excessive. Austin, — U.S. at-, 113 S.Ct. at 2812.

We affirm the denial of forfeiture based on the trial court’s conclusion that the forfeiture *552would violate the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment. Although we do not necessarily agree with the reasoning of the trial court, we are satisfied that the trial court applied the multi-factor approach approved in Austin and considered some of the factors used by other courts in considering this issue.1

Affirmed.