Posted on 01/08/2020 5:30:51 PM PST by nickcarraway
When police arrested Luis Melendez on drug charges, they found $2,928 in cash alongside drugs and weapons in his bedroom.
The drugs and weapons became evidence in his criminal case, but prosecutors also went after the money in civil court using a common but little-understood practice called civil asset forfeiture. When Melendez fought to keep the money, they used his statements against him in his criminal case.
New Jersey’s highest court on Wednesday declared this practice an abuse of power, though the ruling upheld Melendez’s conviction based on the other evidence against him.
The decision places additional limits on New Jersey law enforcement’s ability to take money from people before they have been convicted of a crime at a time when state lawmakers are weighing additional reforms to the controversial practice of civil asset forfeiture.
In the unanimous ruling, the state Supreme Court found Melendez “faced an untenable situation — forced to choose between his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and his right not to be deprived of property in the forfeiture matter without due process.”
According to court records, police used a confidential informant to buy drugs from Melendez on four occasions at his Hoboken apartment in 2010. Based on that information, they raided the apartment, finding his parents and a young girl at home and focusing their search on the bedroom they believed belonged to Melendez.
Inside a dresser drawer, they found a large quantity of heroin, a handgun and hollow-point bullets, the cash and, strangely, a pair of handcuffs that belonged to a female police officer “who previously had a long-term relationship” with Melendez.
Following his arrest, the Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office — which was also prosecuting his criminal case — tried to seize the $2,928 through civil asset forfeiture, claiming the money was the “proceeds of
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
>>... a pair of handcuffs that belonged to a female police officer “who previously had a long-term relationship” with Melendez.<<
The plot kinkens.
Not a very convincing story.
Sounds like the lawyers are just mad they can’t get at the money.
Maybe there’s more to the case.
Glad they didn’t let him go at least.
Civil forfeiture before conviction is wrong so the court got it right.
Sounds like they need to change the law so that the forfeiture occurs on conviction with the money held as evidence like the gun, ammo and drugs.
Civil forfeiture before conviction is wrong so the court got it right.
Sounds like they need to change the law so that the forfeiture occurs on conviction with the money held as evidence like the gun, ammo and drugs.
There is no "choosing between."
“...using a common but little-understood practice called civil asset forfeiture...”
For anyone other than government thugs it’s called theft.
This ruling will cheer many here.
Though I find it funny that a dope dealing moron with no means of support can count on getting his huge stacks back because “civil forfeiture is bad”.
There is a big difference between proving in court that the money was proceeds from crime and then taking it and just taking it before conviction.
You should know that in this country, we're innocent until proven guilty.
*** Though I find it funny that a dope dealing moron with no means of support can count on getting his huge stacks back because “civil forfeiture is bad”. ***
$2900 is huge stacks?
Sir, it’s good to see you again.
It feels like many years have passed.
In court papers, Melendez said the money police seized was legitimate and came from a prison account that belonged to him while serving time for unrelated crimes. The Hudson County Prosecutor’s Office used that statement in Melendez’s criminal case as part of their effort to prove the drugs and weapons seized from the same bedroom as the money also belonged to him. [...] The high court’s ruling effectively bans prosecutors from using such a tactic in the future. But the ruling also found that because of other evidence against Melendez, the error was “harmless” in his case.
I completely agree.
There are already criminal forfeiture laws - but civil forfeiture means easier swag for government thieves.
Around the country, people driving are pulled over and discovered with various amounts of cash.
The police confiscate the money under shady rules about suspicion.
They keep the money. Most people can’t afford to fight over it.
“Civil forfeiture before conviction is wrong so the court got it right.......”Sounds like they need to change the law so that the forfeiture occurs on conviction with the money held as evidence like the gun, ammo and drugs.”
The changes in law need to go further than you suggest.
Mere possession of the money does not prove how the money was obtained; possession does not prove the money was not obtained in any other, in any “legitimate” way. It is not a mere question of whether or not the defendants drug dealing made him any money. It is a question of needing to PROVE the source of the money found.
But yes, backing up to your point, there should be NO “civil asset forfeiture” (a) when there has been no conviction of any crime, and FURTHER, (b) without a full court proceeding, with full defense of the defendant, on the additional question of the forfeiture itself. FURTHER, the holding of any assets to be waiting that outcome must be assigned by the court, with a court assigned private bank account established for it, NOT “held in trust” by the police or prosecutors (they have not yet proven they are entitled to it).
Police and prosecutors all over the country are abusing “civil asset forfeiture” for the funding of their departments.
Upon conviction, no problem; drug money should be taken. But not until conviction; escrow it until then.
I wonder how how many cases of cash forfeiture are actually bribes.
Take the guy’s $20K, then send him on his way. What better way to disguise a payoff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.