Replies

"How can it be completely separate if the justification for a forfeiture claim is suspicion of a criminal act? Or can the feds simply file a civil forfeiture case against you with no reason given?"

Look, there is a difference between civil and criminal cases. They are apples and oranges, two different things which an co-exist. For instance, in most places one can civil contempt can be used a s a means for collecting unpaid child support and ensuring future payments and there are also criminal statutes under which the state can proceed against non-paying non-custodial parent for the crime of nonsupport. These are both separate causes of action. There are actually several places in the law where one could face both criminal charges and a civil lawsuit for the same underlying conduct.

The stated justification for civil forfeiture statutes may be to see that drug traffickers can't keep their ill-gotten gains, but that doesn't mean that the State actually has to prove the underlying criminal conduct. It's harder to prove something beyond reasonable doubt than it is to convince a jury to be 51% sure that the property was used or intended to be used for any one of several enumerated purposes. In fact, since it's a civil case and not a criminal case, there is no need that all twelve jurors are convinced of the state's case. All they need is a majority in civil cases in most states.

Hey, I don't like these cases either. I think it's just a way to punish one guy even more than we punish the next for the same conduct. It's an end around the stiff burden of proof required in a criminal case. It often results in people being punished twice. Not only that, it also results in quite a few innocent people losing their money or other property because they don't have the means to defend a civil lawsuit and at least in my state if not all states, public defenders are not appointed in civil cases.

These cases happen all the time. There are dozens and dozens pending in the Court in my county. Most are just for whatever cash someone might have had in their pocket when they were arrested for drugs or for vehicles in which drugs were found. Sometimes really nice vehicles are seized. Sometimes they find huge loads of cash (last month our county seized 1.1 million from one vehicle). Sometimes they just take large cash forfeitures that don't appear to be related to the case but it's all done as part of the same plea agreement. They rarely ever settle a case with us without forcing our clients to sign separate agreed orders where they agree to let the State keep whatever it was they seized.

As for the comment about the feds, obviously the feds can't file a civil action against you for no reason, and nor can the states. But I believe that federal asset fofreiture laws are similar to state laws in that foreiture is a civil action with a much lower burden of proof.

Since rp doesn't seem to know, exactly how do you go about proving the innocence of the property in a case like this? It sounds like you're going to have to haul into court, swear in, and question a bucket of dirt.

OK, thanks for the clarification. Do the authorities have to win their civil case before they seize the property?