Posted on 08/25/2007 12:32:37 PM PDT by microgood
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A trucker has sued the Drug Enforcement Administration, seeking to get back nearly $24,000 seized by DEA agents earlier this month at a weigh station on U.S. 54 in New Mexico north of El Paso, Texas.
Anastasio Prieto of El Paso gave a state police officer at the weigh station permission to search the truck to see if it contained "needles or cash in excess of $10,000," according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the federal lawsuit Thursday.
Prieto told the officer he didn't have any needles but did have $23,700.
Officers took the money and turned it over to the DEA. DEA agents photographed and fingerprinted Prieto over his objections, then released him without charging him with anything.
Border Patrol agents searched his truck with drug-sniffing dogs, but found no evidence of illegal substances, the ACLU said.
The lawsuit alleges the defendants violated Prieto's right to be free of unlawful search and seizure by taking his money without probable cause and by fingerprinting and photographing him.
"Mere possession of approximately $23,700 does not establish probable cause for a search or seizure," the lawsuit said.
It said Prieto pulled into the weigh station about 10:30 a.m. Aug. 8 and was let go about 4 p.m.
DEA agents told Prieto he would receive a notice of federal proceedings to permanently forfeit the money within 30 days and that to get it back, he'd have to prove it was his and did not come from illegal drug sales.
They told him the process probably would take a year, the ACLU said.
The ACLU's New Mexico executive director, Peter Simonson, said Prieto needs his money now to pay bills and maintain his truck. The lawsuit said Prieto does not like banks and customarily carries his savings as cash.
"The government took Mr. Prieto's money as surely as if he had been robbed on a street corner at night," Simonson said. "In fact, being robbed might have been better. At least then the police would have treated him as the victim of a crime instead of as a perpetrator."
The DEA did not immediately respond Friday to a request for comment from The Associated Press.
Peter Olson, a spokesman for the Department of Public Safety, which oversees state police, said he could not comment on pending litigation.
The lawsuit names DEA Administrator Karen P. Tandy, DEA task force officer Gary T. Apodaca, DEA agent Joseph Montoya and three state police officers identified only as John or Jane Doe.
I wish I was on the jury. The govt. won’t let it go to a jury of taxpayers though.
BUMP
IF the Anti-American Communist Liar's Union is telling the truth, I agree with you, but I find it hard to trust an organization that was founded with the purpose of destroying the country.
What happens if you deny them permission to search?
The Gov. will lose this one!
In 1982 I took $63k cash with me to pay the balance on an airplane I was buying in Arizona.
It’s only illegal to take over $10k out of or into the country without declaring it, other than that you can carry as much as you want.
The ACLU vs. DEA thieves.. man you give the hard questions..
Why denial = probable cause!
;O)
That's a beautiful catch there, that Catch 22.
I daresay that the DEA officials involved in this incident would likely have a hard time proving that whatever money that is currently in their wallet is theirs and didn't come from illegal drug sales
They don't need 'probable cause' just a 'reasonable suspicion'. Those are two completely different legal standards.
L
Since when did it become illegal to carry around large amounts cash? What has become of our once free country....
There are portions of current laws that presume large amounts of cash are prima facie evidence of illegal activity. They were instituted as part of the war on drugs. Some have indeed lost their money, or spent large portions of it trying to get it back.
Nonsense.
I think it's probable cause to confiscate it, but there should be a very low bar of "proof" and expedited procedure to get it back.
Normally, I’d have to say “good for him” suing the government for taking the money for no apparent reason... But since the ACLU is involved, I know the money must be dirty. The ACLU only gets involved when the person whose rights were supposedly violated is a criminal.
I think any law that puts the burden of proof on the accused is unconstitutional.
Only the government has the right to possess your cash.
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.