Law Commons^™

Innocence Lost: Bennis V. Michigan And The Forfeiture Tradition, Donald J. Boudreaux, A. C. Pritchard

Missouri Law Review

In Bennis v. Michigan, the Supreme Court upheld the State of Michigan's forfeiture of Tina Bennis's joint ownership interest in a car used by her husband for a tryst with a prostitute. Surveying its prior cases, the Court found that Tina Bennis's innocence of the offending conduct was irrelevant to the constitutionality of Michigan's forfeiture of her ownership interest. In so finding, the Court relied on the tradition of forfeiture to affirm the constitutionality of the "tyranny and avarice" condemned by James Wilson-a leading framer of the Constitution. The Anglo-American tradition of civil forfeiture, however, is considerably narrower than the …

Currency Contamination And Drug-Sniffing Canines: Should Any Evidentiary Value Be Attached To A Dog's Alert On Cash?, Andy G. Rickman

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Note, Civil Forfeiture And Innocent Owners, Deborah Challener

Journal Articles

Although forfeiture is an ancient practice, its constitutional validity has only recently been seriously questioned. Historically, the Supreme Court has relied on a legal fiction-that the property itself is guilty-to confiscate property without regard to the Constitution. Cloaking itself in the "guilty property fiction," the Court has virtually ignored the property owner's culpability. In Bennis, the Court decided whether an owner's interest in property is subject to forfeiture when the owner entrusts the property to a party who uses it to commit a crime, even if the owner has no knowledge of the illegal use.

Civil Forfeiture And The War On Drugs: Lessons From Economics And History, Donald J. Boudreaux, Adam C. Pritchard

Articles

This Article uses economic analysis to show how civil forfeiture’s role in the war on drugs creates contrary incentives for law enforcement officials and encourages abuses. The Article then reviews the history of civil forfeiture and the Supreme Court’s forfeiture jurisprudence, which seems incoherent. The Authors warn that the judiciary should be skeptical of civil forfeiture and its importance to the war on drugs. The Article proposes a constitutional framework, grounded in economics and history, to limit forfeiture abuses.

Status Of Double Jeopardy And Forfeiture Law In The Sixth Circuit, Stefan D. Cassella

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Double Jeopardy—Civil Forfeitures And Criminal Punishment: Who Determines What Punishments Fit The Crime, Barbara A. Mack

Seattle University Law Review

This Article will attempt to distill from this confusion a meaningful double jeopardy policy, applicable to parallel civil and criminal proceedings, that takes into account the history of double jeopardy, recent changes in statutory law, and the contemporary chaotic state of parallel civil and criminal proceedings. Under current law, double jeopardy protects against three abuses: (1) a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, (2) a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction, and (3) multiple punishments for the same offense. This Article will show that the multiple punishments prong has little basis in law, other than reliance …

Preface: Double Jeopardy In Washington And Beyond, Justice Philip A. Talmadge

Seattle University Law Review

The prohibition against double jeopardy is of ancient lineage in western civilization. In a ringing and scholarly dissent that rewards reflection, Justice Hugo Black said:

Fear and abhorrence of governmental power to try people twice for the same conduct is one of the oldest ideas found in western civilization. Its roots run deep into Greek and Roman times. Even in the Dark Ages, when so many other principles of justice were lost, the idea that one trial and one punishment were enough remained alive through the canon law and the teachings of the early Christian writers. By the thirteenth century …

The Double Jeopardy Implications Of In Rem Forfeiture Of Crime-Related Property: The Gradual Realization Of A Constitutional Violation, Andrew L. Subin

Seattle University Law Review

Over the past decade, the government has escalated its "war on drugs." Although the "war" has not decreased drug use or limited the availability of drugs on the street, the government continues to sacrifice the constitutional rights of its citizens in an effort to escalate the hostility. Since the "zero tolerance" policy of the Reagan Administration, the government has relied heavily on the forfeiture of property related to drug crimes as a tool to deter and punish the illegal distribution of drugs. The federal forfeiture statute, 21 U.S.C. § 881, allows the government to seize any property used to facilitate …