Michigan Leading Changes To Asset Forfeiture Laws - Exposing The Truth

Asset forfeiture (aka civil forfeiture) has been a trending topic the past 12 months, enough so that it has caught my eye as something to keep tabs on. When originally introduced, it was a tool for law enforcement to battle drug kingpins and gang leaders. But in recent years it has become a juggernaut of abuse, raking in at least $250 million worth of property and money from Michigan citizens since 2001. In other words, it has become a supplemental form of funding for police.

Two bills [HB 5212 and HB 5081] are being introduced in the Michigan state legislature, which are aimed at curbing some of the power that the state has in its asset forfeiture laws. One of the leading opponents of asset forfeiture is the pro-bono, public interest law firm, The Institute for Justice, which previously evaluated the asset forfeiture laws of each state and graded them, assigned a D- grade to Michigan.

[,,,]
Michigan requires prosecuting attorneys to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the property is (either directly or indirectly) related to the crime and thus subject to forfeiture. This standard is significantly lower than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard required to actually convict someone of any criminal activity.

On the other hand, law enforcement receives all proceeds of civil forfeiture to enhance law enforcement efforts, creating an incentive to pursue forfeiture more vigorously than combating real criminal activity. As the numbers indicate, multi-jurisdictional task forces work extensively with district attorneys and police departments, and over 1.6 billion being deposited federally in 2010. The number and scale of property being seized is rising nationally.

This newly introduced bill, aimed at providing more stringent measures aimed at protecting private property from unjust seizure. The bill was crafted by Representative Jeff Irwin(Democrat) from Ann Arbor. There are actually two bills, but the most important of the two would require a conviction before a seizure can take place.

House Bill 5081, is a bill sponsored by Rep. Tom McMillin, which would require more transparency in forfeiture cases.

But a new bill seeks to change that in Michigan. House Bill 5081 would "give taxpayers the ability to see the full picture of what assets are seized, whether the person was ever convicted of a crime, the value of the assets, and other details pertaining to the process."

[,,,]
Rep. Geiss said the bill, "sheds sunlight on what type of materials or dollars are being forfeited and what is being done with those."

"The goal should be that we have zero forfeitures," Rep. Geiss said. "But the reality is that a lot of departments base their budgets on recurring forfeiture dollars. There have been allegations in the state of Michigan that monies have not been used properly and inventory has not been maintained. I think the bill puts a structure in place that everyone has to follow, with a central repository. It is my hope that this will make sure funds are not diverted and confiscated property is tracked."

Michigan Leading Changes To Asset Forfeiture Laws - Exposing The Truth