The Constitutionality Of Civil Forfeiture

Working as the budget director for the mayor of the city of Kelsey, we have recently been getting numerous complaints from the citizens about an increase in crime and also an issue of the public demanding for more police officers. With the population of the city growing daily, the increase of crime is continuing to progress as well. The mayor has informed us that this past year is the highest increase in crime in the city’s history, that the federal government has reduced the federal pass-through money for the state and that the budgeting group needs to revamp the budget for the coming year. Within this document as the

In establishing a § 1983 claim the claimant must first determine which constitutional right was violated. In this case, Dave Douglas, Taylor Reveley, and George Walkers claims fall under the Fourth Amendment because they have not been arrested or detained for pretrial. Each plaintiff will argue that the police officers seized them unreasonably and therefore violated the Fourth Amendment. First, the claimant must establish that the government actor was acting under “the color of law.” In this case, the police officers were acting in their official capacity as on-duty cops. HotCop, as a possible contractor with law enforcement may also operate under the color of law and therefore be subject to suit as well. This will be addressed further later in the memo. Each potential plaintiff and the possible defenses to their claims is addressed below.

In 2009, news broke that five Camden New Jersey Drug Task Force police officers operating in South Camden, NJ were indicted on police corruption. Specifically, the officers were alleged to have stolen money and drugs from dealers and used the funds and drugs to pay informants and plant evidence to stiffen charges against suspects. Moreover, these officers falsified police reports, paid for false witness testimony and used some of the stolen cash for personal use. South Camden, NJ has been struggling with crime for years. Consequently, hardworking citizens and police officers entangled in the community have failed to rid the drug problem that has evolved and produced other no drug related crime. Community policing has been in effect for several years in this rundown city and police continue to struggle with disappointment. Of the five officers indicted three pled guilty, one was convicted and the last was acquitted of all charges (Newall, 2010).

Grant, H.B. and Terry, K.J. 2008: Law Enforcement in the 21st Century. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle, River, NJ. Pearson/Prentice Hall.

David Leon Riley was pulled over by a police officer for driving with expired license plates. Once pulled over for operating the vehicle without valid registration, the officer discovered that Riley also had a suspended license. Following police policy for suspended licenses, the officer impounded Riley’s car. At that point another officer performed a mandatory inventory search of the car that led to the discovery of two handguns under the hood of the vehicle. Police proceeded to arrest Riley for the possession of loaded firearms. The arresting officer also found and seized a cell phone in Riley’s possession along with items associated with the “Bloods” street gang. Photographs and videos accessed on the cell phone connected Riley to the

The NYPD’s stop-and-frisk practices raise serious concerns over racial profiling, illegal stops and privacy rights. The Department’s own reports on its stop and frisk activity confirm what many people in communities of color across the city have long known: The police are stopping hundreds of thousands of law abiding New Yorkers every year, and the vast majority are black and Latino. In 2011, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 685,724 times. 605,328 were totally innocent (88 percent). 350,743 were black (53 percent). 223,740

We must start in the research of the NYPD Frisk Program: Noble Cause Corruption situation with the Fourth Amendment‘s which protects a person against unreasonable searches and seizures of the U.S. Constitutional 4th Amendment. Further review of the 4th Amendment law provides guidelines for the search and seizure between police and citizens in a public place.

In the PBS Frontline documentary, Policing the Police, the Newark Police Department are under investigation for violating citizens of their constitutional rights when being stopped and searched. Newark is one of the most dangerous cities in the United States, so the police feel as though they have to be aggressive and suspicious of certain people. Others like Jelani Cobb, a writer and historian, feel like there is another way to police the community without violating their rights. A lot of people want safe to have a safe community, but how can they feel safe if they can’t even trust their own police department. The mayor of Newark and his team are destined to make this change. So, Jelani Cobb decides to tag along with some of the Newark police to help investigate.

As Shaila Dewan stated in her article from the New York Times; “Police Use Department Wish List When Deciding Which Assets to Seize”. The practice of civil forfeiture has come under fire in recent months, amid a spate of negative press reports and growing outrage among civil rights advocates, libertarians and members of Congress who have raised serious questions about the fairness of the practice, which critics say runs without thinking or caring about the opinions, rights, or feelings of others over due process. (Nov. 9, 2014).

Introduction The Prohibition of alcohol in America, coined as the Noble Experiment, was a nation-wide ban on the sale, production, transportation, and importation of alcohol in place between 1920 and 1933. Supported by members who wanted a “dry state” stating that it was important for health and moral in the society. Fiercely fought against by members of society that preferred a “wet state” and to keep alcohol legalised. The Prohibition lead to many underground Bootleggers and saloons, changing the way society functioned during the 1920s. The Prohibition served as an experiment, the belief that alcohol was the root of all crime; many states banned it in an attempt to curb crime, to control the behaviour of society as a whole, and ultimately

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

or public danger. No one can be put on trial again for the same crime.

of police paid off to look the other way while they went about their business.

Over the last several years, most police departments have been facing numerous financial challenges. The main reason is law enforcement agencies are expected to do more with less and the stagnant economy. The combination of these factors has been placing pressure on many departments to begin imposing budget cuts. Evidence of this can be seen with a survey that was conducted by the University of North Carolina. They found that 67% of police departments made some kind of budget cuts for 2011. The most severe reductions were occurring in large police departments such as Los Angeles, Atlanta and Detroit. (Delfem, 2011, pp. 199 - 205) This is illustrating one of the most pressing issues affecting a wide variety of police departments across the country. To fully understand what is happening requires: examining the situation, how they are able to interact with other agencies (i.e. state / federal) and recommending the way this relationship can be improved. Together, these elements will offer specific insights about how police departments can effectively address this problem.

Dating back to Colonial America, tax collectors were abusing their rights with general warrants by conducting illegal searches, and seizing individuals without probable cause or evidence of wrongdoings (Guide, 2015). Our founding fathers established the Fourth Amendment on December 15th 1791, and would further protect each citizen with the right to search and seizure. However, many cases have claimed illegal searches and seizures, resulting in numerous lawsuits where evidence was obtained. Many factors fall under search and seizure, from homes and airports to a single lawn. The purpose of this paper will be to inform the reader of the legal definition of the