Judge Rules Albuquerque Civil Forfeiture Law Unconstitutional, Upholds Innocent Until Proven Guilty - Forbes - Nick Sibilla, Institute for Justice:
August 1, 2018 - "In a landmark decision, a federal court ruled that Albuquerque’s civil forfeiture program 'violates procedural due process' because it forced hundreds of property owners to prove their own innocence.... Judge James Browning also found that the city’s 'forfeiture officials have an unconstitutional institutional incentive to prosecute forfeiture cases'.…
"Back in 2014, the Institute for Justice and The New York Times exposed a vehicle forfeiture conference where New Mexico law enforcement officials made a series of startling statements, including calling civil forfeiture a 'gold mine' that offered 'little goodies.' Spurred in part by those Kinsley gaffes, lawmakers unanimously approved legislation to abolish civil forfeiture throughout the state. When the law took effect in July 2015, New Mexico became the second state (following North Carolina) to only allow criminal forfeiture, which requires a criminal conviction to forfeit property. Yet Albuquerque refused to comply with the new state law, and continued to seize cars under its municipal forfeiture ordinance....
"Arlene [Harjo] had to fight to save her car from civil forfeiture, almost a year after New Mexico had abolished the practice.... Unlike criminal cases, where defendants are presumed innocent and the government must bear the burden of proof, under Albuquerque’s civil forfeiture ordinance, Arlene had to prove her innocence....
"Arlene joined with the Institute for Justice and sued the city in August 2016 to win back her car. Just a few months after she filed her lawsuit, Albuquerque returned her car [but] her challenge continued, culminating in her legal victory on Saturday....
"Judge Browning declared that the city’s forfeiture program was unconstitutional for two main reasons. First ... Albuquerque’s forfeiture program 'violates due process by depriving car owners of their property unless they prove their innocence,' which creates an 'unconstitutional risk of an erroneous deprivation.' He cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Nelson v. Colorado, which invalidated a Colorado law that required criminal defendants whose convictions had been overturned to prove their innocence in order to recover court costs and fees.....
"Second ... the city has 'an unconstitutional institutional incentive to prosecute forfeiture cases because, in practice, the forfeiture program sets its own budget and can spend, without meaningful oversight, all of the excess funds it raises from previous years'....
"As the U.S. Supreme Court ruled almost 40 years ago in Marshall v. Jerrico, 'A scheme injecting a personal interest, financial or otherwise, into the enforcement process may ... in some contexts, raise serious constitutional questions'.... Directly quoting from the Marshall decision, Browning concluded that there is a ‘realistic possibility’ that forfeiture officials’ judgment ‘will be distorted by the prospect of institutional gain'."
Read more: http://gdspoliticalanimal.blogspot.com/2018/08/civil-forfeiture-unconstitutional-nm.html
'via Blog this'
August 1, 2018 - "In a landmark decision, a federal court ruled that Albuquerque’s civil forfeiture program 'violates procedural due process' because it forced hundreds of property owners to prove their own innocence.... Judge James Browning also found that the city’s 'forfeiture officials have an unconstitutional institutional incentive to prosecute forfeiture cases'.…
"Back in 2014, the Institute for Justice and The New York Times exposed a vehicle forfeiture conference where New Mexico law enforcement officials made a series of startling statements, including calling civil forfeiture a 'gold mine' that offered 'little goodies.' Spurred in part by those Kinsley gaffes, lawmakers unanimously approved legislation to abolish civil forfeiture throughout the state. When the law took effect in July 2015, New Mexico became the second state (following North Carolina) to only allow criminal forfeiture, which requires a criminal conviction to forfeit property. Yet Albuquerque refused to comply with the new state law, and continued to seize cars under its municipal forfeiture ordinance....
"Arlene [Harjo] had to fight to save her car from civil forfeiture, almost a year after New Mexico had abolished the practice.... Unlike criminal cases, where defendants are presumed innocent and the government must bear the burden of proof, under Albuquerque’s civil forfeiture ordinance, Arlene had to prove her innocence....
"Arlene joined with the Institute for Justice and sued the city in August 2016 to win back her car. Just a few months after she filed her lawsuit, Albuquerque returned her car [but] her challenge continued, culminating in her legal victory on Saturday....
"Judge Browning declared that the city’s forfeiture program was unconstitutional for two main reasons. First ... Albuquerque’s forfeiture program 'violates due process by depriving car owners of their property unless they prove their innocence,' which creates an 'unconstitutional risk of an erroneous deprivation.' He cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Nelson v. Colorado, which invalidated a Colorado law that required criminal defendants whose convictions had been overturned to prove their innocence in order to recover court costs and fees.....
"Second ... the city has 'an unconstitutional institutional incentive to prosecute forfeiture cases because, in practice, the forfeiture program sets its own budget and can spend, without meaningful oversight, all of the excess funds it raises from previous years'....
"As the U.S. Supreme Court ruled almost 40 years ago in Marshall v. Jerrico, 'A scheme injecting a personal interest, financial or otherwise, into the enforcement process may ... in some contexts, raise serious constitutional questions'.... Directly quoting from the Marshall decision, Browning concluded that there is a ‘realistic possibility’ that forfeiture officials’ judgment ‘will be distorted by the prospect of institutional gain'."
Read more: http://gdspoliticalanimal.blogspot.com/2018/08/civil-forfeiture-unconstitutional-nm.html
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment