AG Holder finally ending corrupt civil forfeiture laws?!

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Some of the best news I've heard yet, as I can think of nothing more egregiously spawned and exploited by the Drug War. That said, I believe Michigan has developed their own asset seizure/forfeiture programs wholly separate from this federal scheme. In other words, Michigan’s Controlled Substance Act has the game built in and will be completely unaffected in/from our state courthouses.
 

cephalopod

Well-Known Member
Some of the best news I've heard yet, as I can think of nothing more egregiously spawned and exploited by the Drug War. That said, I believe Michigan has developed their own asset seizure/forfeiture programs wholly separate from this federal scheme. In other words, Michigan’s Controlled Substance Act has the game built in and will be completely unaffected in/from our state courthouses.
When law enforcement officials execute a search warrant pursuant to an investigation of the illegal possession, delivery, or manufacture of controlled substances, this is often times followed with a seizure of property. Property seized under Michigan’s Controlled Substance Act (MCL 333.7101 et seq.), which has a value of $50,000 or less, falls under this Act’s forfeiture provisions (MCL 333.7521 to 333.7533). Specifically, MCL 333.7521(f) broadly defines what property may be seized:

Any thing of value that is furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for a controlled substance…that is traceable to an exchange for a controlled substance…or that is used or intended to be used to facilitate any violation of this article.
In other words, the law gives officials wide latitude to determine what property to seize. There are circumstances where officials do not need a court order to seize property. MCL 333.7522 allows the police to seize property:
(a) Incident to a lawful arrest…(c)There is probable cause to believe that the property is directly or indirectly dangerous to health or safety. (d) There is probable cause to believe that the property was used or is intended to be used in violation of this article or section 17766a.
Challenging the seizure is an often over-looked process in criminal cases. The procedure is outlined in MCL 333.7523(c). Above all else, time is critical. After receiving a forfeiture notice, the person challenging the forfeiture only has 20 days to file a written claim in the property and post the required bond. The bond has to be 10% of the value of the claimed property, but not less than $250 or more than $5,000. What if the property is only worth $1000? A bond of $250 must still be posted. Both the written claim and the bond have to be posted with the “local unit of government or the state”. In Ingham County, generally, both have to be filed with the Ingham County Prosecutor’s Office. Once the claim and bond have been posted, the Prosecutor must “promptly” bring the forfeiture proceedings before the trial court.
During the forfeiture proceedings, the prosecutor must prove that the property seized was related to the “exchange” of controlled substances by “preponderance of the evidence”. (In re Forfeiture of $25,505; 220 Mich.App. 572; 560 NW2d 341 (1996)). A clearer definition of this standard says that “Anything of value that can be traced to an exchange for a controlled substance is subject to forfeiture.” (In re Forfeiture of $1,159,420; 194 Mich.App. 134; 486 NW2d 326 (1992)). Later cases have stated that there must be “A substantial connection between [property] seized from claimant and exchange of controlled substance”. (In re Forfeiture of $275; 227 Mich.App 462; 576 NW2d 431 (19ninety eight) In other words, there has to be a strong connection and the prosecutor cannot simply rely on a cop’s “Mere suspicion” to prove their case. (See id).
If a person’s cash is seized, the reverse becomes true. It is then up to the person who filed a forfeiture claim and bond – not the prosecutor – to prove that the cash seized was not related to the “exchange” of controlled substances. There is a strong presumption that “Any money that is found in close proximity to any property that is subject to forfeiture…is presumed to be subject to forfeiture [as well]”. (MCL 333.7521(f)). When it comes to cash, the person challenging the money forfeiture has an even higher standard to meet. Specifically that person must rebut this presumption “by clear and convincing evidence”. (MCL 333.7521(f)).
While some of the forfeiture provisions may be confusion, at least one thing is clear: “If no claim is filed or bond given within the 20-day period…the property is forfeited and [the prosecutor] shall dispose of the property.” (MCL 333.7523(d).
 

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
^^^ Yeah, that's exactly what I had in mind.

The Controlled Substance Act is a cancer that has been metastasizing for 45 years now. A criminal substance prohibition scheme hatched to rid society of drugs, yet the solution and problem continue generations later without question. These same drugs now uncontrollably permeate (are found within) the worlds largest prison population it has literally created. There is simply no excuse this mistake and it's unintended consequences have not been addressed within a half century. The parable of the Garden of Eden comes to mind as God could not prohibit his population of two from partaking in the apple. Today's popular and prison culture are often indistinguishable and our inner cities are war zones no one can understand or address? Do we not teach the tragedy of alcohol prohibition and it's organized crime to our children?
 

silusbotwin

Well-Known Member

“This benefits nobody but drug dealers,” Dunning said. “Federal law is a tremendously bigger hammer. I don’t see what hammer we are going to have over these people now.”
I'm not sure which part of that is more fucked up.....the part where he says it benefits nobody but drug dealers when he should have said "this benefits EVERBODY but me and my colleagues who are trying to get rich off of human suffering"

or

the part where he views federal assistance as a hammer that he can bash in the skulls of the people he has sworn to protect and serve.

This is glaring evidence of the fact that LEO mind-states are fucking WARPED, PERVERSE, and TWISTED and that LEO views the public as their enemy prisoners of war.
 

silusbotwin

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure which part of that is more fucked up.....the part where he says it benefits nobody but drug dealers when he should have said "this benefits EVERBODY but me and my colleagues who are trying to get rich off of human suffering"

or

the part where he views federal assistance as a hammer that he can bash in the skulls of the people he has sworn to protect and serve.

This is glaring evidence of the fact that LEO mind-states are fucking WARPED, PERVERSE, and TWISTED and that LEO views the public as their enemy prisoners of war.

That was an excellent article TheMan. At least Nebraska is one of the states that will finally have fair justice, and I have faith it isn't far away until Michigan catches up. I've noticed alot of light being shined on the tragedy that is civil forfeiture lately, including in the mainstream media.
 

Skylor

Well-Known Member
Some folks believe if U are not just like them, U are evil or no good. They don't really believe in freedom and the right to do as one pleases with their own lives. Freedom is their eyes is the right to do as they so please with no regard to others.

I view freedom as sometimes having to hear or see things U don't agree with. The freer the land, the more often it happens.
 

silusbotwin

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't this, along with the fact that Federal agencies are now prohibited from helping local LEO with going after MMJ suspects, mean that those of us who are staying away from guns and the other things mentioned in that article would be offered a bit more legal protection from unjustified seizures?
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
I feel like this is too good to be true. If this is real, it means SERIOUSLY HUGE things for us growers! Looks like the war on drugs is finally ending to me. What do you all think?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/holder-ends-seized-asset-sharing-process-that-split-billions-with-local-state-police/2015/01/16/0e7ca058-99d4-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html
HALLELUJAH! Eric Holder believes in the Bill of Rights!

Now we just need the other 18,000 police agencies in this country to start respecting it as well.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Wouldn't this, along with the fact that Federal agencies are now prohibited from helping local LEO with going after MMJ suspects, mean that those of us who are staying away from guns and the other things mentioned in that article would be offered a bit more legal protection from unjustified seizures?
One would certainly get that feeling from the announcement. We will see how well it sticks in actual practice.
 
Top