Civil forfeiture is a legal process that allows law enforcement agencies to seize property related to criminal activity. A civil forfeiture proceeding continues even when the property owner is not charged with a crime. Civil forfeiture aims at combating organized crime, drug trafficking, and terrorism.

There has been growing concern about the misuse of civil forfeiture laws in California. The misuse leads to unjust consequences for individuals and communities. Innocent people lose their cash, vehicles, homes, and other belongings without due process due to the misuse of the process.

There have been recent reforms aimed at addressing the abuse of civil forfeiture. However, significant challenges remain. If you have suffered civil forfeiture abuse in California, our experienced attorneys at Asset Forfeiture Attorney can provide the legal expertise you need to challenge wrongful seizures.

An Overview of Civil Forfeiture in California

California law permits criminal and civil forfeiture. In criminal forfeiture, the defendant must face a conviction for a crime for the state to seize property linked to that crime. However, law enforcement can seize property without the owner facing criminal charges in civil forfeiture.

The legal burden of proof in civil forfeiture falls on the property owner. They must demonstrate that their property is not connected to illegal activity. Law enforcement initiates civil forfeiture proceedings when they believe your property is linked to criminal activity.

These proceedings involve many assets, including vehicles, cash, and homes. Law enforcement frequently seizes property without prior notice or a hearing, forcing owners to initiate complex legal proceedings to recover it. California law governs civil forfeiture through the following statutes:

  • California Health and Safety Code
  • California Penal Code
  • California Vehicle Code.

The process of civil forfeiture takes the following steps:

  • Property seizure. Law enforcement seized property suspected of being connected to criminal activity. Seized assets often encompass cash, real estate, and motor vehicles.
  • Notice to the property owner. The agency must notify the owner about the seizure and their right to contest it within 30 days.
  • Determining forfeiture type. Judicial forfeiture is required if the seized property is worth more than $40,000. If it's $40,000 or less, administrative forfeiture takes effect.
  • Filing a forfeiture petition. In judicial forfeiture cases, the government must file a civil petition in court naming the property as the defendant.
  • Burden of proof. The government must prove that the property is connected to illegal activity by clear and convincing evidence.
  • Owner’s response. The property owner must file a claim and may need to post a bond to contest the forfeiture within a specific timeframe.
  • Court proceedings. If the case goes to court, both sides must present evidence. The judge decides if the property forfeiture should move forward.
  • Default judgment. If the owner does not respond or appear, the government may win by default, resulting in a forfeiture.
  • Distribution of proceeds. If the court grants a forfeiture, the proceeds are distributed between the law enforcement agency and state funds.

The law enforcement seizes assets related to controlled substances and the proceeds or tools of drug trafficking. Over the years, critics have pointed out instances of civil forfeiture abuse. The abuse involves using the civil forfeiture proceedings to target innocent individuals.

Abuse of Civil Forfeiture

Civil forfeiture allows law enforcement to seize your assets without charging you with a crime. While it was designed to combat drug trafficking and organized crime, civil forfeiture has been subject to significant abuse. Some ways through which civil asset forfeiture is abused include:

Low Burden of Proof

The low burden of proof required for the government to seize assets is a significant problem with civil forfeiture. In criminal cases, the prosecution must prove your guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." However, in civil forfeiture cases, only a "preponderance of the evidence"

Authorities only need to show it is more likely than not that the property was connected to a crime. Because civil forfeiture requires only a preponderance of the evidence, police, and prosecutors can more readily justify seizures and retain control of assets.

Property Is "Guilty," Not the Person

In California, law enforcement brings civil forfeiture actions against the property rather than pursuing charges against the owner. The legal fiction allows authorities to bypass many protections given to criminal defendants. Owners must prove their innocence or show their property was not involved in illegal activity. The shift of the burden onto property owners undermines the presumption of innocence.

Profit Motive for Police Departments

Police departments in California can keep a significant part of the proceeds from seized assets. The potential financial gain creates a direct incentive to seize property, regardless of whether a crime occurred. It encourages "policing for profit," where departments may prioritize seizures over actual justice.

Targeting Vulnerable Communities

Abuse disproportionately affects poor and minority communities. If you face civil asset forfeiture as a property owner, you should secure experienced legal counsel to contest the seizure. Unrepresented owners often forfeit their right to challenge the seizure by failing to file a timely claim. Low-income individuals and people of color are easy targets for law enforcement looking to boost revenue.

Seizing Without Charges or Convictions

A key issue in California is that law enforcement can seize your property even if you were never arrested or charged. For this reason, innocent people lose homes, vehicles, or cash without any criminal record. The practice punishes individuals without due process.

Lack of Transparency

There is limited oversight on the use of forfeited funds. Though some reporting requirements exist, critics argue they are not strictly enforced. This lack of transparency allows for the potential misuse or waste of public resources.

Delayed or Denied Justice

Many property owners must wait months or years to hear their case in court. Some give up trying to recover their assets due to prolonged delays, complicated paperwork, and legal costs. The delays deny property owners justice and reinforce the imbalance of power.

High Legal Costs to Fight Back

Property owners must hire a lawyer and pay filing fees to contest a civil forfeiture. In many cases, the cost to fight the forfeiture exceeds the value of the property seized. It discourages rightful owners from pursuing legal action. Additionally, it encourages law enforcement agencies to continue the practice.

Legislative Reforms Fall Short

Although SB 443 established a conviction requirement and increased thresholds, it does not entirely prevent administrative forfeitures under $40,000. More robust oversight and accountability measures are needed to avoid ongoing abuse.

Senate Bill 443

California Senate Bill 443 (SB 443) was signed into law in 2016. It introduced significant reforms to civil asset forfeiture practices in the state. The bill ensures due process during forfeiture proceedings. Additionally, it aims to protect individuals from potential abuses of the process. The provisions of S 443 include:

  • Criminal conviction requirement. SB 443 mandates that, in most cases, a criminal conviction is necessary before law enforcement can seize your property. A conviction is necessary before a forfeiture involving cash under $40,000 or valuable property. The requirement raised the threshold for cash seizures from $25,000 to $40,000.
  • Limiting federal equitable sharing. The law restricts state and local agencies from passing state laws by transferring cases to federal authorities through the fair sharing program. Law enforcement agencies can only receive a share of federally forfeited property if there is an underlying conviction in the federal case.
  • Enhanced due process. SB 443 strengthens protections for individuals by requiring a higher standard of proof in forfeiture cases. For cash between $25,000 and $40,000, the burden of proof increases to "beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • Protection for innocent third parties. SB 443 safeguards innocent individuals from losing property they did not know was involved in criminal activity. It addresses the concern that such individuals were unfairly affected by forfeiture practices.
  • Attorney's fees and legal representation. SB 443 allows for the recovery of attorney's fees for individuals who successfully challenge unlawful forfeitures. The reimbursement makes it more feasible for marginalized communities to contest wrongful seizures.

Before SB 443, law enforcement agencies misused state forfeiture laws by participating in the federal equitable sharing program. The program had more lenient standards and allowed agencies to keep more proceeds. The practice led to concerns about "policing for profit. Financial gain motivated the actions by law enforcement to seize property.

By implementing these reforms, SB 443 ensures that property is only forfeited when there is clear evidence of criminal activity. Therefore, it protects individuals' constitutional rights and promotes fairness in the justice system. These changes position California as a leader in asset forfeiture reform. It sets the pace for other states to balance law enforcement objectives with protecting individual rights.

Consequences of Civil Forfeiture Abuse in California

Different aspects of civil forfeiture are susceptible to abuse. The consequences of civil forfeiture abuse include:

Erosion of Property Rights

The erosion of fundamental property rights is a common consequence of civil forfeiture abuse in California. Under the principle of due process, individuals are entitled to a fair hearing before a forfeiture. Additionally, a prosecutor must prove your liability for an offense before a seizure.

However, civil forfeiture allows the government to seize property without charging the owner with a crime. It undermines the core values of the U.S. justice system. Often, individuals have their property seized even if they are not charged with any criminal activity.

It includes situations where law enforcement takes away your property when they suspect a connection to criminal activity. The property owner must prove that the property is not linked to criminal activity. The process of contesting civil forfeiture is time-consuming and expensive.

Disproportionate Impact on Low-Income and Minority Communities

Civil forfeiture abuse in California affects low-income and minority communities. Communities of color are more likely to face asset seizure under civil forfeiture laws. These communities often lack the financial resources to fight back against these seizures.

The impact of civil forfeiture abuse extends beyond just financial losses. It can disrupt the lives of entire families. Abuse of civil forfeiture makes it harder to access essential resources or to recover from financial setbacks. For example, a car seizure could result in someone losing their ability to commute to work, leading to job loss or economic instability.

Undermining Trust in Law Enforcement

Abuse of civil forfeiture laws can undermine public trust in law enforcement agencies. When citizens perceive law enforcement as prioritizing financial gain over justice, it causes distrust and alienation. The mistrust can cause a breakdown in the relationship between communities and police. It makes it more difficult to maintain effective policing and community safety.

Forfeiture abuse can also lead to the perception that police are "revenue generators. When law enforcement agencies profit directly from the seized assets, there is a conflict of interest that can change their priorities. Additionally, it can create a system of incentives that discourages the fair application of the law.

Weakening of Criminal Justice Reform Efforts

The abuse of civil forfeiture undermines broader efforts to reform the criminal justice system. California is actively working to reduce mass incarceration and implement more equitable criminal justice practices. However, civil forfeiture abuse contributes to systemic inequality. It worsens the issues that reform efforts seek to address.

By allowing law enforcement to seize property without due process, civil forfeiture can affect marginalized individuals. It creates racial and socioeconomic disparities. The abuse of civil forfeiture undermines efforts to build a more equitable legal system. Additionally, it obstructs progress toward reform like SB 443.

Find a Competent Asset Forfeiture Attorney Near Me

Civil forfeiture targets criminal enterprises and prevents illegal activities. Unfortunately, its misuse has become a common occurrence in California. The abuse of civil asset forfeiture has far-reaching effects on individuals and society. It ranges from the erosion of property rights and due process to the impact on low-income and minority communities.

Civil forfeiture abuse weakens public trust in law enforcement. Additionally, it places a financial burden on individuals and the justice system. For many individuals, fighting against this injustice is challenging due to the complexities of the legal process. Civil forfeiture abuse can cause you to lose your hard-earned assets or money.

If you are a victim of civil forfeiture misuse, you will require the guidance of a skilled lawyer. At Asset Forfeiture Attorney, we offer expert legal insight for our clients battling asset forfeiture proceedings in California. Contact us today at 888-571-5590 and let us get you through your case.