Posted on 12/13/2002 6:25:09 AM PST by Wolfie
Allowing Cops To Keep Seized Loot is Unconstitutional
New Jersey's practice of letting police and prosecutors keep the money and assets they seize is unconstitutional, a judge said in a case that could affect other states. The ruling, issued by Superior Court Judge Thomas G. Bowen in Salem County, puts a halt, for now, to a system criticized as bounty hunting. The practice gives law enforcement a stake in the cash, cars, computers and other property seized from criminals and suspects.
"The decision will ensure that police and prosecutors make decisions on the basis of justice, not on the potential for profit," said winning attorney Scott Bullock.
The state plans to appeal Wednesday's ruling, and will ask Bowen for a stay that would allow the continued distribution of seized assets, which amounted to nearly $32 million in a two-year period ending in 2000.
"We believe it's a wrong decision," said John Hagerty, a spokesman for the state Division of Criminal Justice. "Civil and criminal forfeiture is a legitimate law enforcement tool that allows police and prosecutors to take the profit out of crime."
The case started with a sheriff's deputy whose son was caught selling marijuana out of her 1990 Ford Thunderbird.
Carol Thomas, 45, of Millville, who was never charged, said she didn't know her 17-year-old son had used it to drive to drug deals. He pleaded guilty and was fined and sentenced to house arrest.
But the state filed a complaint against the car _ titled State of New Jersey v. One 1990 Ford Thunderbird _ and seized it, even though no drugs were found in it and it wasn't actually used in the deals.
She sued to get it back and after it was returned, she filed suit against the state, challenging the constitutionality of civil forfeiture statutes.
Her case caught the attention of the Institute for Justice, a libertarian Washington, D.C., law firm that champions individuals' rights, which took up her cause.
Bullock, in oral arguments last month, told Bowen that law enforcement agencies use the proceeds to pay for office furniture, computer equipment, expenses and, in one case, a golf outing, improperly influencing their decisions about which cases to pursue.
The state, meanwhile, argued that taking the profit out of crime was the whole point of the law in the first place.
The judge agreed with Thomas' lawyer, stating in his opinion that the seizures give law enforcement "financial interests which are not remote as to escape the taint of impermissible bias in enforcement of the laws."
David Smith, an Alexandria, Va., attorney active in civil forfeiture cases, said the ruling would have an impact beyond New Jersey. About 25 states share the loot from civil forfeitures with law enforcement, he said.
This was the first court case to challenge the legality of that practice, according to Smith.
"This will have a tremendous impact outside of New Jersey," he said. "This will go at least as high as the state Supreme Court, and if they agree with the judge, that's likely to be persuasive to other state Supreme Courts."
Thomas, who now works as a dog groomer, couldn't be reached for comment on Thursday. Her home telephone was not answered.
Unfortunately one is inextricably linked to the other. You try to get rid of forfeiture and the government screams that they cant control drugs, and our children will be at risk, and the collapse of society will be immanent etc, etc. The same arguments that the tempest movement used, which was not valid then, and is not valid now.
Liar! It doesn't take the profit out of crime at all - it merely shifts it from the criminals to law enforcement. If anything, the profit should be redirected to the victims of crime, but then again, there aren't any when it comes to drugs, which is where most of the forfeiture money comes from.
What rights would you be referring to here?
Figures. Libertarian lawyers don't chase ambulances, they chase the smoke from the bongs.
Oh you know, the run of the mill ones, like not having your property unconstitutionally seized by the state.
What an outrageous statement! How did we allow such evil people to get into law enforcement? Asset Forfeiture fits the definition of Bills of Attainder which the Constitution specifically prohibits at both the federal and state levels. The reason for the prohibition was this: the Bloody British had the nasty habit of seizing the property of, imprisoning, and even putting to death colonists without the protection of a jury trial. I have been warning about this criminal expansion of RICO since the early 1990's. RICO, like all other unconstitutional legislation adopted for the "Common Good", "Public Safety", or the "General Welfare", begs corruption. Asset Forfeiture is tyranny! By definition it promotes arbitrary "punishment", in many cases where no crime was proven or even existed. It is a grave threat to our freedom and must be abolished and forever branded as too evil for civilized societies.
In a perfect world, perhaps.
I am not paranoid, and I never have worried about being wrongly accused of anything, but...
I am increasingly aware of the high percentage of cops who never should be allowed to be in positions od authority; they are crooks.
The temptation to "set up" people is just too great a temptation, and too high a price to pay for the potential benefit to society.
Sorry.
The vehicles should be confiscated for being used in the commission of a felony and auctioned off/sold and the money donated or put back into the area of where the perp was destroying lives. But hey, I like people, so what do I know? Let these animals run wild killing people. It's the "free" thing to do.
And that's fine; she got her car back. But had she been involved (I tihnk she was, but that's my opinion) then the car goes to the auction block.
That would be one of the consequences of not raising your child properly.
Liar, they're killing people because it's a black market and that's the way black markets work. The free thing to do is decriminalize it - then people won't kill one another to sell or buy it, just like they don't kill one another to buy tobacco, alcohol, software, or cars. (Although they used to kill people over alcohol - during the Prohibition.) Calling the present War On (some) Drugs the "free" thing to do is as dishonest as calling Kalifornistan's energy market "deregulated," as the leftists do.
Cars are also seized for violating prostitution statutes, so I'm not sure I'm buying that.
Good for her for fleeing NY, but where can she go? The War On (some) Drugs is federal.
That is hardly the same as getting busted for having a joint in your car or a couple plants in your house and losing your car or house. Typical WoDie hyperbolie and gross exaggeration.
The vehicles should be confiscated for being used in the commission of a felony and auctioned off/sold and the money donated or put back into the area of where the perp was destroying lives.
That is seldom the case. It goes to buy new exercise equipment for the police, or nifty new ninja outfits.
But hey, I like people, so what do I know? Let these animals run wild killing people. It's the "free" thing to do.
I guess I missed where the owner of this car had been involved in homocides. Oh, wait, you made that up. Another WoDie straw man to prop up your lame support for WoD tyranny.
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.