Civil Asset Forfeiture : A Powerful Weapon Against Crime

For many years, drugs have been the center of crime and the criminal justice system in the United States. Due to this widespread epidemic, President Richard Nixon declared the “War on Drugs” in 1971 with a campaign that promoted the prohibition of illicit substances and implemented policies to discourage the overall production, distribution, and consumption. The War on Drugs and the U.S. drug policy has experienced the most significant and complex challenges between criminal law and the values of today’s society. With implemented drug polices becoming much harsher over the years in order to reduce the overall misuse and abuse of drugs and a expanded federal budget, it has sparked a nation wide debate whether or not they have created more harm than good. When looking at the negative consequences of these policies not only has billions of dollars gone to waste, but the United States has also seen public health issues, mass incarceration, and violent drug related crime within the black market in which feeds our global demands and economy. With this failed approach for drug prohibition, there continues to be an increase in the overall production of illicit substances, high rate of violence, and an unfavorable impact to our nation.

In the United States “civil forfeiture" is a legal procedure which might be brought during or after criminal accusations are recorded in the court. It is a court proceeding recorded against a property or against a person which allows law enforcement to take away cash and or property. Based on the article End of Forfeiture (2017), 87% of federal forfeitures were not criminals but civil, the government didn’t have to convict or charge anyone to take the property. Once the U.S. Lawyer's Office gets a referral from a seizing organization of a seized resource case, that office has 90 days to either document a civil legal case or incorporate the seized resource in a criminal arraignment and name it for criminal Forfeiture. On the off chance that a civil case is not documented within those 90 days, the CAFRA "capital punishment" will keep the United States from continuously recording a civil Forfeiture case. If the advantage is incorporated into a prosecution and the respondent is later vindicated or has a conviction turned around to offer, the property can't be surrendered. Thus, numerous U.S. prosecutors record a suspicious civil forfeiture activity and incorporate the property for criminal forfeiture in an arraignment (Weld, n.d, 2011.).

Even though civil forfeiture is a practice that happens all around the United States, it is a system that many say the police are able to abuse for their own profit. There have been numerous cases where many individuals have been locked in legal battles with the United States government trying to prove that their assets are indeed innocent and not involved with any crimes. Many feel that the civil forfeiture is a form of “policing for profit” especially since many of the assets are used under the Equitable Sharing Program. (Crawford) police can stop motorists, possibly under the pretext of a minor traffic infraction, and "analyze" the intentions of motorists by assessing nervousness, and request permission to search the vehicle without a warrant,

The War on Drugs is one cause for the mass incarceration that has become apparent within the United States. This refers to a drastic amount of people being imprisoned for mainly non-violent crime (“Mass Incarceration” 2016). In addition to people who are not an immediate threat to society being locked up for a substantial duration of time, the economic consequences are costing states and taxpayers millions of dollars. Specifically, every one in five people incarcerated is in prison due to some

The “War On Drugs” and Anti Drug Abuse Act of 1986 required aggressive enforcement. One method is the use of undercover police to enforce these laws. Three factors can jeopardize a dealer’s income: 1) Nonpayment, 2) other dealers encroaching on territories; turf wars and the biggest factor 3) being caught by the police. A method that crack cocaine dealers used to protect these three factors was the use and possession of guns. In the 1980s and 1990’s guns were as plentiful as illegal drugs. The U.S. Department of Justice in a manual of “Promising Strategies To Reduce Gun Violence” cites that “those who are most likely to possess

59% of rape cases and 36.2% of murder cases in the United States are never solved. In 2011, less than half of all violent crimes committed found any resolution. This dilemma poses the question, why are so many violent criminals walking free while so many non-violent offenders are locked up? Although it is not responsible for all of the justice system’s failures, the War on Drugs has been a key factor in exemplifying these failures since 1971. For instance, New York City can be used as the perfect example of just one city in the U.S., representative of so many others, which distinctly illustrates this particular issue. Michael Bloomberg was the mayor of New York City from January 1, 2002 until December 31, 2013. In that time, police spent over one million man hours working 440,000 arrests for marijuana possession alone. This is a lot of police time and resources spent on busting parties instead of tracking down violent criminals. However, this goes beyond any one city or state. Nationwide, the U.S. would save 41.3 billion dollars every year by ending the War on Drugs. This includes tens of millions of man

In pursuit of the war on drugs, changes had been made to the nature of law enforcement and prosecution. Law enforcement have now been more empower with these new policies seem to have diminish civilians rights, such policies gave law enforcement power to violate third and fourth amendment. “Using general warrants, British soldiers were allowed to enter private homes, confiscate what they found, and often keep the bounty for themselves. The policy was reminiscent of today’s civil asset forfeiture laws.”(Balko, R, 2013) The civil asset forfeiture statute is an asset seizure of possessions that are alleged proceeds from criminal activity. Criminal activity over the decades had developed and more organized. Criminals would get their mandatory minimum sentence and the crime enterprise would just continue, but legislators’ passed a statute to dismantle entire criminal organizations and it’s known as Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations or R.I.C.O. Passed in 1970 it was used in the prosecution of Sicilian mafia in New York city. Instead of prosecuting criminals individually such as solders and capo, it was effective in shutting down entire criminal organizations. R.I.C.O statute appeared to be effective on the war on drugs. The combination of the two policies provided incentives to battle the war on drug. Assets were disseminated among various law enforcement departments, putting more officers on the streets, obtaining newer police vehicles and countless equipment for law

Modern American CAF derives it’s roots from the policies used by police and prosecutors during the time of alcohol prohibition. Law enforcement during early 20th century would often use civil asset forfeiture against the cars, guns, money, and other property of the people who were busted smuggling liquor. Although alcohol prohibition died 80 years ago with the passage of the 21st and the repeal of the 18th amendments, the most common usage of CAF still lies within the realm of enforcing prohibition laws. Civil asset forfeiture is primarily used to fight drug crimes, especially narcotics trafficking (Van Den Berg, 873). Since the passage of the 1970 Comprehensive Drug Reform Act civil asset forfeiture has been expanded by law enforcement in order to meet the additional billions of dollars of strain that the war on drugs places on the budgets of city and county law enforcement agencies around the nation (Ann- Yu Chi, 1639).

Bifurcates the issue of forfeiture from the criminal trial in future cases. [Health and Safety Code § 11488.4(h)(5)]

Since the late 19th century, the federal and states governments of the United States have enacted laws and policies to deter the use and distribution of illegal drugs. These laws and policies have not only deemed what drugs are legal and illegal, but have also established penalties for the possession and distribution of these substances and established federal agencies to control drug use and administer drug law enforcement. This essay will not only examine the landmark drug laws and policies established by the federal and state governments, but also the enforcement of drug laws.

Half a million people have been arrested for drug related offenses since the war on drugs began. There are two specific myths surrounding these drug offenses. The first is it targeting large drug dealers and dangerous drugs, she disputes both of these. Then she talks about the history behind search and seizure in America. She uses multiple court cases to detail America’s slow increase and acceptance of it.

Concerning Civil asset forfeiture and if it is something that is a relevant tool in order to fight crime, its something that has been known to be extremely controversial to say the least. First to define what forfeiture is and what are the purposes behind it; basically it is where local, federal, or state law enforcement will end up seizing property in the event where they feel there is considerable amount of suspicion that is connected to a crime that law enforcement feels they are guilty regardless of whether they have been convicted of the crime said law enforcement feels they are guilty of.

Law enforcement agencies are being incentivized to pursue asset forfeiture because asset forfeiture destroys “the financial infrastructure of the criminal enterprise” (Lyman). Many criminals are motivated by greed and tend to purchase materials, such as weapons, drugs, cars, or real estates. Criminals are purchasing those materials with black money obtained through illicit criminal activities. Asset forfeiture is an effective law enforcement tool to reduce the incentive for illegal behavior (Lyman). Law enforcement use asset forfeiture by removing tools, equipment, cash flow, and profit to keep the criminal organization ability from operating successfully. Asset forfeiture is a process that results in “transfer of the ownership of property

Since the 1960s, State and federal law enforcement have become more focused into putting an end to drug use. Each year, crimes related to drug use has increased, making the government spend tens of billions of dollars arresting, convicting, and jailing drug users. Because of this ongoing problem, the government can’t help but to wonder “will this ever end?” and “Should we stop fighting?” With these questions being raised about a problem so conflicted, The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch have different views and opinions regarding the Drug War’s Standpoint.

The Criminal Procedure Code, Customs & Excise Laws and several other penal statutes in India have used diction which accepts forfeiture as a kind of penalty.