seizure

Published on: May 16, 2019

Arkansas’ Civil Forfeiture Reforms May Change Little

A new law reforming civil asset forfeiture in Arkansas is set to come into effect in July, but critics argue there are so many loopholes that it will change little in the state.

Civil asset forfeiture is a legal procedure whereby police are able to take possession of an individual’s property if that property is suspect of being involved in a crime. In most states, no criminal conviction is required before property is seized. To seize assets in Arkansas, police only need to show that a “preponderance of the evidence” indicates the property was involved in a crime. This standard is far below the “beyond a reasonable doubt” that is required in criminal cases.
Continue reading

Published on: February 28, 2019

Honda Takes Massachusetts City to Court Over Property Seizure

by Brian Silber

The American Honda Finance Corporation has filed a lawsuit against the city of Revere, Massachusetts, alleging its constitutional rights were violated in 2016 when the Revere Police Department seized a Honda Civic using civil asset forfeiture.

Civil asset forfeiture is the legal procedure whereby law enforcement agencies may take possession of property if it is suspected of being involved in a crime. In most states, neither a criminal conviction nor even criminal charges are needed before property is taken. While there are few restrictions or oversight on the procedure in most of the country, Massachusetts is one of only two states—the other being North Dakota—to earn an F grade from the libertarian Institute for Justice for its civil asset forfeiture laws.
Continue reading

Published on: February 14, 2019

Michigan Senate Passes Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform

by Brian Silber

Yesterday, the Michigan Senate passed a bill which would require a criminal conviction before law enforcement can permanently take an individual’s assets using civil asset forfeiture.

This is the latest attempt by the legislature to reform civil asset forfeiture laws in the state. Last year, a similar bill passed the House but was never voted on in the Senate. Another bill introduced last year was intended to ensure police officers had adequate training when it came to seizing property. A third bill would have put local forfeiture processes under the domain of state law, making asset forfeiture consistent across the state.
Continue reading

Published on: January 10, 2019

Philadelphia’s Problems With Civil Asset Forfeiture Run Deep

by Brian Silber

If anyone knows how unjust civil asset forfeiture can be, it’s Philadelphia resident Norys Hernandez. Law enforcement attempted to seize the house she owned with her sister even though she had done nothing wrong. The authorities attempted to take her home after her nephew was arrested for dealing drugs on the property.

It took years, but Norys eventually got her house back. She was part of a class-action lawsuit that was settled for $3 million last year.

Civil asset forfeiture is the legal process where police may take someone’s property if it is suspected of being involved in a crime. A criminal conviction is not required in most states. In fact, of the four plaintiffs named in the class-action lawsuit who had their houses seized, none were accused of having committed a crime. In three cases, the houses were seized because a relative had been caught selling drugs in the house.
Continue reading

Published on: December 13, 2018

Texas Police Netted $50 million in Asset Forfeitures in 2017

by Brian Silber

In 2017, law enforcement across Texas seized more than $50 million in property, cash, and other assets from private citizens. They were able to do so by claiming these assets were linked to crime. While some of these seizures were taken using criminal forfeiture—that is, as part of cases where an individual was found guilty of a crime—others were taken using civil forfeiture. No criminal charges are required for civil asset forfeiture.

The Texas Attorney General’s Office makes no distinction in its records between civil and criminal forfeiture, so it is unknown how much property was taken from individuals not charged with a crime. Attempts by state legislators to force law enforcement to improve their reporting have repeatedly failed.
Continue reading