Posted on 01/26/2015 5:06:07 AM PST by csvset
NORFOLK
A bill moving through the General Assembly could eliminate a legal process that brings in millions of dollars for law enforcement agencies, but which critics say allows the government to confiscate property unfairly.
HB1287, sponsored by Del. Mark Cole, R-Spotsylvania, would end civil asset forfeitures - state legal proceedings that allow police to keep property seized from criminal suspects. The process rankles civil liberties advocates because such seizures can occur without a criminal conviction.
The proposal mirrors an order from Attorney General Eric Holder earlier this month that drastically curtails the federal asset-forfeiture process. If Cole's bill passes, the loss of both state and federal sources of asset forfeiture funds could put a significant dent in local law enforcement budgets.
From 2008 to 2013, Virginia law enforcement agencies seized more than $57 million through the state civil asset forfeiture process. Using the state process, police can keep 90 percent of the proceeds. The federal programs allow for 80 percent of proceeds to return to the agency that seized the items.
____
Database: How much Virginia agencies take and return
____
It can be cheaper for a person facing the forfeiture to surrender the property than to hire a lawyer and fight the seizure in court, said Rob Poggenklass, a legal fellow with the ACLU of Virginia.
Law enforcement uses another process - criminal forfeitures - to seize property after a criminal conviction, Poggenklass said. He did not object to that.
"It's the practice of taking money and not getting a criminal conviction and still keeping the money," he said.
The legislation would limit asset seizure to those convicted of a crime and would delay distribution until after appeals have ended, Poggenklass said.
South Hampton Roads police departments rank among the top in the state for seizures through Virginia's Forfeited Asset Sharing Program. The Virginia Beach Police Department seized 1,208 assets worth a combined $6 million from 2008 through 2013, the most in the state. Norfolk seized the third most - 690 items worth more than $3.45 million. Chesapeake and Newport News round out the top 10 in the state, with seized property worth over $2.23 million and $1.5 million, respectively.
Several law enforcement agencies, including the State Police, opposed the bill at a hearing last week.
In an interview Friday, Virginia Beach Commonwealth's Attorney Colin Stolle declined to speak about the bill but said, in general, the asset forfeiture program benefits law enforcement.
"It allows us to be able to afford equipment and training for officers and prosecutors," he said. "It relieves tax payers from a part of that burden."
If the program ended, Stolle said, it wouldn't change the daily operations of his office.
"Would it impede our ability to function the best we possibly could? Yes," he said. "It would probably interfere quite a bit with the training funding."
Even if Cole's proposal passes, local police can continue to seek civil forfeiture, Poggenklass said.
Holder limited the federal program but left in place asset forfeiture in seizures made in joint state and federal operations.
"Holder left a big loophole," Poggenklass said. "If an agency is part of a joint state-federal task force, the door is wide open for civil asset forfeiture."
The ACLU and the Tea Party are among the groups supporting the legislation, Cole said by email on Friday.
"I understand the goal of the forfeiture law is to take the profit out of crime," he wrote, "however, it is fundamentally un-American for the government to take someone's property when they have never been convicted of a crime."
Still, the bill may not have a real chance of passing.
"We know law enforcement opposes it," Poggenklass said. "Anytime law enforcement opposes a bill in Virginia, it's an uphill battle."
Gary Harki, 757-446-2370, gary.harki@pilotonline.com
Database | Civil asset forfeiture in Virginia, 2008-2013
A previous post on FR mentioned Holder's actions on this issue.
** Cold day in hell I support something that he is behind.
Yeah, by outright stealing from folks, due process be damned.
It was all fun and games when they were only doing it to the druggies.
The fascists in government really don’t want the citizens to own anything. “ownership” and “private property” are things they hate, and they do everything they can to eliminate them.
Any law that allows this seizure is invalid.
Literally, a bunch of modern day highwaymen.
Civil asset forfeiture is perfectly okay - AFTER someone has been convicted of a crime; and when the assets being forfeited are the proceeds of the criminal activity for which said someone has been convicted.
Giving law enforcement the power to seize, and then KEEP, the assets of persons who have merely been arrested, or even charged, but NOT convicted, is simply wrong.
OOPS: “Asset forfeiture is perfectly okay - etc. etc.”
I neglected to remove the word “civil” while editing my post.
No it wasn’t.
That's part of the rub for me though...who decides what property was obtained via criminal activity?
If I work by day in a legitimate job, and cook meth at night, who's to say what items I own have been purchased with proceeds from the criminal or the lawful employment and are liable for forfeiture?
This whole thing has always stunk, open for abuse and the victim has little recourse as their reputation has already been damaged even by just the accusation...
And I fully concur with your last comment that seizing and keeping in lieu of any conviction is simply wrong [THEFT ON A GRAND SCALE].
Okay.
Maybe it's time we seriously revisit our approach to our criminal code.
That would make things easier on all three branches of our government and enable us to reduce ALL of their budgets.
Maybe they could let YOU decide which assets you will keep - within the limits of your legitimate income.
The Kia vs. the Ferrari...hmmm...
As long as you could have afforded the Ferrari based on your legitimately earned income, go for it.
What we need is a prohibition against the seizure-of-assets’ benefitting the politicians in Washington.
You’ve got that right.
They’ve got themselves a cash-cow—the American working man and woman—and they’re not about to stop milking it!
You are correct.
This bill has little chance of passing.
Sadly, they have never been doing it "only to the druggies". It's always been nothing more than legalized theft and corruption.
Police should never be a profit center.
Who is to say what someone could buy with "legitimately earned income"? I've made more than a million dollars in the past 10 years if you add up all my pay over that time. Who is to say how I should spend what portion of my income?
Another point about these immoral asset forfeiture programs is that if we have to leave these evil programs in place, then the 'revenue' should go into the general fund. From past experience, we know that when that happens, the police become a lot less interested in the program.
A decade or two ago, Oregon had an initiative petition on the ballot to ban such forfeitures. The police opposed the measure, but it won the vote.
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.