Civil Asset Forfeiture News

[sumpnz]

https://youtu.be/4TPVtpkb7ik

4th Circuit apparently rules that the government must prove their case, rather than the victim proving their innocence, in a civil asset forfeiture case.

[Ben]

Good news if it's both upheld and also followed by local LE.

I guess at this point it's an old guy thing, but I continue to be amazed at how many people's retort is, "Why are you carrying cash around?"

[Hawkmoon]

I just watched that video, and I came here to post about it. You beat me to it.

It's an encouraging decision. I wonder if the state of North Carolina (or the police department involved) will appeal to the Supreme Court. IMHO, it's shocking that the Supreme Court could ever have even indirectly approved the concept of civil asset forfeiture in the absence of a criminal conviction. It makes a mockery out of the constitutional principle of innocent until proven guilty.

[sumpnz]

I just watched that video, and I came here to post about it. You beat me to it.

It's an encouraging decision. I wonder if the state of North Carolina (or the police department involved) will appeal to the Supreme Court. IMHO, it's shocking that the Supreme Court could ever have even indirectly approved the concept of civil asset forfeiture in the absence of a criminal conviction. It makes a mockery out of the constitutional principle of innocent until proven guilty.

I hope they do appeal to SCOTUS.  The Thomas/Gorsuch/Alito/Barrett/Kavanaugh wing will likely rule that forfeiture requires a conviction. 

[sumpnz]

I would NOT have counted on Scalia to rule that way however.  And definitely not Kennedy either. 

[MechAg94]

I hope they do appeal to SCOTUS.  The Thomas/Gorsuch/Alito/Barrett/Kavanaugh wing will likely rule that forfeiture requires a conviction.

This is one of those law enforcement areas where I am not so sure what the outcome will be.

[Brad Johnson]

Would be nice to have CAF spanked hard. It was ripe for abuse when it began and it's only gotten worse over time.

Brad

[MikeB]

I worry even our current SCOTUS will pull a two different jurisdictions thing like they do with double jeopardy. Kavenaugh especially was not worth the mess to get him confirmed. Though I get why pulling him from the confirmation process wouldn’t have been the right decision either.

[sumpnz]

Thread necro:

Dea up to shenanigans seizing money from travelers in Atlanta.

I’m surprised there haven’t been leo's participating in these things swinging from lampposts.

https://youtu.be/G3P6G1WkRtY?si=f5mYoAM14SwdE6ZU

[HankB]

. . . I’m surprised there haven’t been leo's participating in these things swinging from lampposts . . .

They just haven't helped themselves to John Wick's stuff.

Yet.

[Brad Johnson]

Necro because Indiana State Supreme Court has ruled Hoosier State residents have the right to trial by jury in Civil Asset Forfeiture cases.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFmq_DQfZQ4

Definitely a step in the right direction, but not nearly enough. Now if we could just get Congress off its ass to pass a law that CAF is straight up illegal in cases with no conviction...

Brad

[230RN]

I thought the seized asset itself, through some crazy twist of the law, was the actual criminal in custody, but could not defend itself and be found guilty or innocent since, well, it was not a person.

Did I misunderstand that? 

? ? ?

[grampster]

Iirc, the liberal Michigan Supreme Court a few years ago ruled CAF Constitutional based on some high seas maritime practice in the 1700s.

[230RN]

^ Yes, that's ringing a bell for me.

[HankB]

Iirc, the liberal Michigan Supreme Court a few years ago ruled CAF Constitutional based on some high seas maritime practice in the 1700s.

Was there an American flag with a gold fringe in the courtroom?