Asset forfeiture laws allow police to seize property, including cash, vehicles, electronics, and real estate, that they suspect is involved in criminal activity. In many cases, the owner is not charged with a crime but still has their property taken. While there are arguments on both sides about the fairness and utility of these laws, it’s important for citizens to understand when and how police can legally seize assets.
Civil Asset Forfeiture
Most asset seizures happen through civil asset forfeiture laws. This means police suspect the property was used in a crime or obtained illegally, but they do not have to prove the owner was convicted of a crime. The case is against the property itself, not the owner. Some examples include:
- Cash seizures during routine traffic stops if the police think the money is tied to illegal drug sales, tax evasion, or other suspected crimes. Police may seize any cash over $10,000 that they believe is tied to criminal activity.
- Vehicles that police suspect were used to commit a crime or facilitate illegal activity, such as transporting drugs or soliciting prostitution. Even if the owner is not charged, the vehicle may be seized.
- Real estate property that police believe was purchased with funds from criminal activity or used to facilitate crimes on the premises. This includes property used for producing, selling, or storing illegal drugs.
- Electronics like computers or phones that were used in financial crimes, child pornography, or other cyber crimes.
In civil forfeiture cases, the burden of proof is on the owner to show the property was obtained legally. Police only need probable cause for suspicion. Property can be permanently seized without ever charging the owner with a related crime.
Criminal Asset Forfeiture
Criminal asset forfeiture occurs when property is seized after the owner has been arrested and found guilty of a crime. In this case, the assets are seized as part of the criminal penalty. Examples include:
- Vehicles, weapons, equipment, or other property used in the commission of a crime as punishment upon conviction. For example, seizing a car used for human trafficking.
- Illegal proceeds or profits from criminal activities like embezzlement, fraud, or tax evasion. Authorities can seize any money or items purchased with the proceeds.
- Real estate property where serious crimes occur regularly. Local nuisance laws allow closing and seizing locations used for things like drug dealing, prostitution, or gang activity.
- Companies involved in criminal activity through the owner or employees can be seized or dissolved. For example, assets of a company engaged in securities fraud.
The standard of proof is higher in criminal cases because the owner has been convicted. Police must clearly connect the assets to the specific crimes for which the owner was found guilty. However, in many states and under federal law, the assets can still be seized using civil procedures in tandem with criminal charges.
Federal Asset Forfeiture Laws
At the federal level, asset forfeiture is primarily handled through the United States Department of Justice and the United States Treasury Department. Major federal laws include:
- The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 – Allows seizure of property related to drug crimes, including real estate, vehicles, equipment and monetary instruments. This marked the beginning of large-scale, modern civil asset forfeiture.
- The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act – Passed in 1978 to combat organized crime. It allows seizure of assets purchased with proceeds from racketeering activity under RICO statutes, including money laundering.
- The Controlled Substances Act – Provides authority for federal agencies, including the DEA and FBI, to seize assets tied to drug crimes through both civil and criminal forfeiture.
- The USA PATRIOT Act – Expanded federal authority to seize assets related to terrorism, terrorist organizations, and money laundering following the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Controversies Over Asset Forfeiture Laws
While asset forfeiture is meant to fight criminal activity, many critics argue it violates civil liberties. Controversies include:
- Incentives for police departments to seize assets for financial gain with limited oversight or burden of proof standards. There is great incentive to seize assets even when evidence is lacking.
- Disproportionate targeting of low-income individuals and racial minorities who lack resources to fight back or hire legal counsel. The seizures often represent significant portions of a person’s net worth.
- Seizures of property from innocent family members who share assets or vehicles with suspected criminals. Family members are often also targeted.
- Lack of conviction needed to permanently lose property deprives individuals of due process protections. The civil standards fail to protect innocent owners.
- Policing for profit corrodes public trust in law enforcement and the justice system. It undermines community relationships.
- Failure to restrict how police departments use proceeds from seized assets. There are few rules governing spending of seized asset funds.
- Neglect of property after seizure leads to deterioration, damage, or depreciation before owners can challenge the forfeiture. Owners suffer from neglect of assets while contesting forfeitures.
Potential Reforms
While asset forfeiture can be an effective tool, many critics argue reforms are needed to protect civil liberties, improve oversight, require convictions, and establish a higher burden of proof on authorities before seizing property permanently from citizens. Some reforms advocated by opponents include:
- Requiring a criminal conviction before assets can be forfeited, except in extenuating circumstances with judicial approval.
- Banning state and local agencies from transferring seized assets to federal control under more lenient federal forfeiture laws.
- Limiting how agencies can use proceeds from forfeited assets to remove financial incentives. Restrictions could cap spending on salaries, equipment, and other areas prone to abuse.
- Establishing a “gross proportionality” standard so the value of assets seized is not excessive relative to the alleged underlying crime. This helps protect low-income individuals.
- Providing counsel for indigent owners to fight forfeiture when they cannot afford legal costs and burden of proving the assets were legally obtained.
Consult an Asset Forfeiture Lawyer
If you believe the seizure of your property was unlawful, consulting an experienced asset forfeiture attorney from Glober and Glober is crucial. We can advise you of your rights and legal options to fight the forfeiture. A knowledgeable lawyer can guide you through the complex process and represent your interests in challenging unjust seizures in court.
Get in touch. You can visit our office at:
422 Jacksonville Dr. Suite B, Jacksonville Beach, FL 32250.
Call us today for a free consultation on (904) 587-4446.
