Tuesday, February 03, 2015

Surge in bipartisan desire to limit asset forfeiture abuses

It seems like prosecutors are aggressively pursuing asset forfeiture in Tarrant County the Metroplex. Last year it was seizing vehicles from college-student pot dealers at TCU. Now we hear of a thief whose pickup truck was seized after he was arrested for stealing three 18-packs of beer.

Meanwhile, in Austin, legislators prepare to debate a remarkable variety of legislation aimed at limiting or at least documenting civil asset forfeiture by law enforcement.

State Rep. David Simpson recently argued for requiring a criminal conviction to seize assets, while Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa and Rep. Jeff Leach have both filed legislation to raise the standard the state must meet (from "preponderance of the evidence" to "clear and convincing evidence") for the state to seize assets.

There's a remarkable level of interest in this topic from across the political spectrum. Legislation by Rep. Phil Stephenson would require audits of forfeiture funds to "include a detailed report that itemizes all seizures of proceeds or property under this chapter and that indicates the specific criminal offense on which each seizure was based and, if charges were brought in connection with the offense, the disposition of those charges." Rep. Borris Miles has filed legislation limiting the application of asset forfeiture in certain misdemeanor cases to repeat offenders.

At an event in December sponsored by the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Andrew Kloster of the Heritage Foundation recommended that anyone interested in forfeiture reform should review these three sources:
Given the level of interest in asset forfeiture among Texas legislators in both parties, that's probably a good reading list for staffers and reporters who'll have to deal with this topic as well. In addition to those resources, the Office of Court Administration in December published a report titled "Asset Forfeiture in Texas: DPS and County Interactions" (pdf) which Grits would add to Kloster's recommendations, at least for a Texas-specific audience.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

There's a heap of Police State money in this issue, and we know who prevails in Texas and elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

Hey, please don't pile undeserved abuse on Tarrant County. That beer thing happened in Big D (County).....

Gritsforbreakfast said...

You are totally right, 10:31, my bad. For some reason I mentally placed Hutchins in Tarrant. Just a brain fart. Will correct.

Gilbert G. Garcia said...

One way to stop highway robbery, direct the proceeds go to drug rehab and reimbursement of victims rather than police and prosecutors.

Anonymous said...

Meanwhile, all the criminals are thinking "Yay, we're gonna get to keep our money!"

Gritsforbreakfast said...

Right, 5:04, because criminals are well known for closely following the legislative process.

Anonymous said...

Why shouldn't a dope dealers car be seized?

Anonymous said...

Seizing assets was legal in Germany too during Hitler's reign of power. We have moved to an era of the "just us" system in Texas!

Anonymous said...

I agree. IF, and that's a big IF, we allow such broad reasons to seize property, take it out of the hands of the police and prosecutors and give it to truly deserving causes.

rodsmith said...

actually the quickest and easiest way to stop this is simple.

pass a law that requires any asset forfeiture to begin with a "CRIMINAL CONVICTION" with evidence during said conviction that shows not only said access and how it was a profit or used in the crime. I.E any asset forfeiture order should only come from the sentencing judge as part of said CRIMINAL CONVICTION.

that would stop this illegal shit in it's tracks.

Anonymous said...

@rodsmith, you want to give prosecutors a financial incentive to seek convictions? Really?

rodsmith said...

well 6:30 before the DA can do that he/she has to get that conviction first. in today's illegal injustice system that means a plea bargain which would have to spell it all out. No way to hid the states attempt at stealing his/her property. So most will probably at that point tell the thief to get fucked i'll see you in court. Where hopefully the jury would get off their lazy useless asses and do their real job and control the out of control prosecutor and judges.

rodsmith said...

another good side effect of that would be the total collapse of the former united states of America's court system which is now only set to take a very very limited cases to a real trial. 95% now end in a plea bargain. even a 10-20% change in that and the system would go boom