Making an interim policy permanent, Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton has strengthened rules governing civil asset forfeitures, the seizure by law enforcement agencies of cash and other property primarily from drug trafficking and sales suspects.
Becton said the changes include requiring civil asset forfeitures be tied to a filed criminal case. That means no more property seizures can target suspects against whom charges have not been filed.
Property subject to such seizures is usually regarded as that used to help facilitate drug trafficking or sales, items acquired in exchange for drugs or items acquired with “proceeds traceable” to illegal drug activity. That latter category can include cars and homes knowingly purchased with money derived through illegal drug activity.
Seizing property from people who ultimately aren’t charged with a crime, some critics have said, is unfair and an abuse of law enforcement power. A 2010 report by the Institute for Justice describes such seizures as “one of the most serious assaults on private property rights in the nation today,” and can “dangerously shift law enforcement priorities … toward the pursuit of property and profit.”
“The community rightfully has tremendous concerns about the use of the civil asset forfeiture process by law enforcement,” Becton said in a statement. “I have listened to the concerns and instituted this new policy on a permanent basis. We must only use civil asset forfeiture when absolutely necessary and in conjunction with a criminal case.”
Another change is that the amount of property seized must be worth at least $1,000 for the district attorney’s office to consider civil asset forfeiture. Before the interim policy was adopted by Becton’s office in June 2019, that amount had been $500.
Also, any law enforcement agency seeking to seize property must serve a “Notice of Non-Judicial Forfeiture Proceedings” and a “Claim Opposing Forfeiture” with anyone who has, or may have, an interest in the seized property. Those notices also now must be translated into multiple languages, including Spanish and Mandarin.
I’m a conservative who disagrees with many of Ms. Becton’s policies and politics…but this is one with which I agree. There has been too much corruption with innocent victims having to go to court to get their wrongfully seized property back. I advocate for cops, but I also believe they’re is corruption in police departments all over the country, and they, too, must be reined in.
Let’s have integrity make a comeback, huh?
I agree completely, but I still wouldn’t vote for her to be re-elected.
Ditto.
I don’t have much use for Benton or her policies in general; however, this is a good change. I hope more DAs across the nation will follow suit.
Conservative in name only! These damn liberal policies are killing us!
But what’s in the fine print.
Something fishy going on. I don’t trust her at all.
Nope, not in name only. pro life, Trump voter, etc., but the police departments, and law enforcement, including the FBI, are rife with corruption. A quick internet search would yield lots of results of people who were stung by forfeiture laws—and even served jail time when mistakes were made with things like cotton candy (no joke) were mistaken for drugs. The police departments have been feathering their nests with money made from what most people would consider theft.
Firsts, I would never vote for Becton, either, but this is a good change.
FPN, I don’t have the answers, but it’s certainly not just for police departments to act as criminals by seizing property not legally obtained. They’re not just seizing property from drug dealers, either. People are entitled to due process, and seizing property without charging with a crime isn’t due process. The government is rarely in the business of altruistic practices.
Should have proofed more closely: “there is corruption,” not “they’re is corruption.”
@anonymous, I also agree. But what am I not seeing? Will drug dealers be allowed to sell drugs and keep all their toys? What will be the downfall?
They get to take someone’s property/assets without being charged for a crime. Seems odd that they we’re ever able to do that.
The problem may take care of itself if the assets didn’t end up in the hands of the police. As far as I can tell, there is no constitutional bases for asset seizure prior to conviction. I believe the practice should be stopped immediately.
Anything Becton does is suspect. I would like to read examples of property that was seized before and the reasons for the seizure. The article is to vague.
https://www.heritage.org/insider/summer-2019-insider/the-police-can-take-your-stuff-the-civil-forfeiture-reforms-we-still
On the face it seems the guy got taken for a ride. However they did not say what the extenuating circumstances were. There are always two sides to a story.
Having said that it looks like a huge amount of money and goods were taken from citizens in the past few years. I just think each case has to be judged on its own merits.
While I still dislike Becton and want her gone, she is right on on this one. Civil asset forfeiture is ridiculously abused, and needs to be tightly monitored if not outright banned. Though again, why is it up to a DA to decide these things? A DA should be nothing but a functionary enforcing the law as passed by the legislature and signed into law by the governor. They aren’t supposed to be making the law themselves. Where is our legislature when it comes to this? Too busy passing bills to enable institutional discrimination and legalizing spreading AIDS.
I agree with this decision. Law Enforcement should not be in the business of revenue generation, whether from speed traps or asset forfeiture.
Oh God not fortnite….they can’t take away my fortnite. I’m going to fight this. KIDS NEED FORTNITE!!!! IT KEEPS ME SANE THROUGH THESE TIMES!!! Can I get an ahhmen?
“Rep. Justin Amash (L-Mich.) today introduced the Civil Asset Forfeiture Elimination Act to repeal civil asset forfeiture nationwide.
Federal, state, and local law enforcement use civil asset forfeiture to take billions of dollars in cash and property from private citizens each year without convicting the owners of any crime. Instead, the government brings a civil action against the property itself, alleging that the property is “guilty” of being connected to criminal activity. This allows the government to take property without needing to charge the owner with a crime, prove their guilt, or otherwise afford them all the rights of a criminal defendant. Often, the government gains ownership of such property automatically unless the owner files a claim for it within a short period of time. And when an innocent owner does file a claim, many jurisdictions put the burden of proof on the owner to prove their innocence, rather than requiring the government to prove their guilt.”
For rest of press release from yesterday go to Congressman’s website,
https://amash.house.gov/media/press-releases/amash-introduces-bill-eliminate-civil-asset-forfeiture
Am sure these two press releases were purely coincidental.
Say the cops have a valid search warrant for a two-bedroom apartment. One bedroom has three occupants and no drugs. The other bedroom is unoccupied, with a shoe box in the closet containing 8 oz of meth and $35,000 cash, but no identifying items or info. The cops/DA can’t prove any of the three people in the other bedroom own the meth, so no conviction. No conviction, so the money goes back to whoever claims it? Is that how we want it handled?
Nobody going to claim money found with drugs.
Good now they can keep there assets because they are just going to turn them loose.No room in jail lmao.
I get the feeling we only have half the story here.
Asset seizure is a system that’s ripe for abuse. For starters, they can still seize assets without a criminal conviction. Second, the people that benefit from seized assets are also the gatekeepers, more or less, on if a seizure will be requested. I know a judge needs to approve it but approval should be automatic once you know how to word the statement the judge reads. It’s also next to impossible for a citizen to fight an asset seizure.
I hope that includes guns that have been confiscated for no reason.
Hunter Biden is breathing a sigh of relief.