Criminal Defense Lawyers

What is Civil Asset Forfeiture and How Does it Work?

Civil asset forfeiture is a controversial legal process that allows law enforcement to seize assets, like cash, cars, and property, that they suspect are connected to criminal activity. The assets can be seized without ever charging or convicting the owner of a crime.

How Asset Forfeiture Works

During a routine traffic stop or criminal investigation, police may seize assets they believe are tied to illegal activity. To keep the seized assets, law enforcement must file a civil lawsuit against the property and prove it is connected to criminal conduct.The owner of the assets does not need to be charged or convicted of a crime for the assets to be forfeited. In fact, in most cases the owner is not even accused of wrongdoing. It is a civil action against the assets themselves, not the owner.This means property owners bear the burden of challenging the seizure and proving their own innocence in court to get their assets back. This flips the assumption of innocence in the American legal system.

The History and Original Intent

Civil asset forfeiture laws were passed in the 1970s and 1980s during the War on Drugs. The intent was to hit drug kingpins in the wallet by seizing cash and assets obtained through the drug trade.Police could seize assets before securing a criminal conviction. This allowed law enforcement to dismantle drug operations by freezing assets before they could be hidden or spent.

How Forfeiture Expanded Over Time

While civil forfeiture was intended for major criminal enterprises, over time it has been used in smaller scale crimes like minor drug possession. Police departments have seized assets in cases when no one is ever arrested or charged.Assets worth less than $2,000 make up the majority of state and local forfeitures. High value seizures over $100,000 are rare.

Policing for Profit Incentives

Critics argue civil forfeiture has turned into “policing for profit” because law enforcement agencies often get to keep some or all of the seized assets. This creates a monetary incentive to pursue forfeitures.Local and state agencies can bypass state laws by partnering with federal agencies through “equitable sharing agreements”. This allows them to keep up to 80% of seized assets under more permissive federal forfeiture laws.

Lack of Protections for Innocent Owners

Unlike criminal forfeiture, there is no “innocent owner” defense in many civil proceedings. Property owners bear the burden of proving assets were legally obtained, which can be difficult without access to bank records or other documentation seized by police.It can take months or years for owners to get a forfeiture case before a judge. In many states and under federal law, indigent owners do not have the right to a court-appointed attorney during forfeiture proceedings.

Calls for Reform from Across the Political Spectrum

In recent years, civil asset forfeiture has faced growing bipartisan criticism. Conservative and progressive groups alike argue the system lacks basic protections for property rights and due process.Four states have abolished civil forfeiture entirely: New Mexico, Nebraska, Maine, and North Carolina. Nearly 30 states now require a criminal conviction before assets can be forfeited.Reform advocates say more protections are needed at the state and federal level to ensure forfeiture is limited to criminal enterprises and no longer used against everyday owners not charged with a crime.

How Forfeiture Impacts People and Communities

• Burden on Low Income Owners – Forfeiture often impacts low income owners and communities of color the hardest. Many lack the resources to fight back in court or hire an attorney.
• Nightmares for Innocent Owners – There are countless stories of innocent owners fighting to get their cars, cash, or homes back after police seizures.
• Hardship for Small Businesses – Cash intensive businesses like restaurants have had their bank accounts seized, forcing them to close while fighting the forfeiture case.
• Perverse Incentives for Law Enforcement – With billions in forfeiture revenue each year, critics argue police have an incentive to pursue assets over seeking justice.

Notable Civil Forfeiture Cases

• Motel Caswell – In Massachusetts, the Caswell family fought for years to keep their family-run motel after the government tried to seize it, arguing drug deals took place there without the owners’ knowledge.
• Pedro Reynoso – New York police seized over $300,000 from Reynoso, a struggling barbershop owner. It took over two years and a lawsuit to get his money back after he was never charged with a crime.
• James Morrow – The DEA seized $82,000 in life savings from Army Sergeant James Morrow as he passed through an airport in Pittsburgh. He had to spend over a year fighting to get his money back.

Ongoing Supreme Court Case

The Supreme Court recently agreed to hear a major civil forfeiture case in 2023 that could impact state laws across the country.The case centers around an Alabama woman whose car was seized after her son was caught with drugs inside. She was never charged with a crime but had to wait months to get her car back.The case challenges whether civil forfeiture violates the 8th Amendment ban on excessive fines when used against innocent owners. The court’s ruling will likely clarify due process rights in future forfeiture actions.

Conclusion

Civil asset forfeiture remains one of the most controversial practices in law enforcement today. While supporters argue it cripples criminal operations, critics see an abusive system in need of major reform to protect innocent people from unwarranted seizures.The debate over balancing law enforcement power with civil liberties continues as new legislation aims to rein in forfeiture abuses. In the meantime, seizures continue nationwide as billions in assets are diverted to police budgets each year.