The S.C. Will Decide Whether You Have a Right to a Prompt Hearing After Cops Seize Your Property

[Kamaji]

The Supreme Court Will Decide Whether You Have a Right to a Prompt Hearing After Cops Seize Your Property

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two consolidated cases by Alabama women whose cars were both seized for more than a year before courts found they were innocent owners.

C.J. CIARAMELLA
4.18.2023

Do you have a right to a prompt hearing after the government seizes your property? The U.S. Supreme Court will consider the question in its upcoming term.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Culley v. Attorney General of Alabama, two consolidated cases concerning whether property owners have a due process right to a hearing to determine if police had probable cause to seize their property.

The issue may seem esoteric, but it's hugely important to people who have their property seized by police under civil asset forfeiture laws. Under civil asset forfeiture laws, police can take property suspected of being connected to criminal activity even if the owner hasn't been charged with a crime. Property owners then often have the burden of going to court and proving their innocence, a process that can take months and sometimes years.

Take the two cases at issue: In the first, Halima Culley's son was pulled over by police in Satsuma, Alabama, while driving Culley's car. He was arrested and charged with possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. The City of Satsuma also seized Culley's car. It took 20 months, during all of which Culley was bereft of her vehicle, before a state court ruled that she was entitled to the return of her car under Alabama's innocent-owner defense.

*  *  *

These sorts of long delays have been documented elsewhere around the country. In 2018, three Detroit residents filed a class-action lawsuit alleging that Wayne County police and prosecutors seized their cars and forced them to wait months, sometimes years, for a hearing. Two years later, the Institute for Justice, a libertarian-leaning public interest law firm, filed another class-action lawsuit challenging Wayne County's asset forfeiture program, including its practice of not providing defendants with prompt post-seizure hearings.

"The government should not be able to take your car without providing you with a prompt opportunity to challenge the seizure," Dan Alban, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, said in a statement. "In criminal cases, after the government arrests you, it must hold a probable cause hearing shortly after the arrest so that a judge can make a preliminary determination about whether the arrest was legitimate. The government should provide the same kind of prompt hearing after it takes your property."

The specific question before the Supreme Court is which test district courts should apply when determining if someone's 14th Amendment right to due process was violated by being deprived of a prompt hearing.

*  *  *

Source:  https://reason.com/2023/04/18/the-supreme-court-will-decide-whether-you-have-a-right-to-a-prompt-hearing-after-cops-seize-your-property/

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Big case.  Hope to hell they get it right and stick a fork in the eye of civil asset forfeiture.

[roamer_1]

Big case.  Hope to hell they get it right and stick a fork in the eye of civil asset forfeiture.

Yeah... But the big question is if they will have to pay the storage fees... Because if so, any win would be rendered moot.

[libertybele]

 

[Smokin Joe]

Yeah... But the big question is if they will have to pay the storage fees... Because if so, any win would be rendered moot.

I'd think this would reduce those if stuff has to happen quicker.

[roamer_1]

I'd think this would reduce those if stuff has to happen quicker.

It's a typical trick in rural counties... Lost a truck in Browning (Blackfeet rez) and another in Lincoln county. In both cases, by the time the court stuff was settled, the cost of county storage far outweighed the value of the truck. I DID get the browning truck back with a well placed bribe in the dark of night... But I had to write the one in Eureka off.

[Kamaji]

It's a typical trick in rural counties... Lost a truck in Browning (Blackfeet rez) and another in Lincoln county. In both cases, by the time the court stuff was settled, the cost of county storage far outweighed the value of the truck. I DID get the browning truck back with a well placed bribe in the dark of night... But I had to write the one in Eureka off.

Storage charges, particularly if they go to the benefit of the government ultimately, may also be a grounds for challenge if the natural effect of the storage charges is to effect, as a practical matter, a taking of property without due process or compensation.

[roamer_1]

Storage charges, particularly if they go to the benefit of the government ultimately, may also be a grounds for challenge if the natural effect of the storage charges is to effect, as a practical matter, a taking of property without due process or compensation.

Right... Adding lawyer fees to the high cost of storage, that has already exceeded the value of the rig... If you lose, I mean... Which you likely will. It ain't like someone ain't already tried like that before. And I know you'd win on appeal, one way or the other... But all that would have to come out of my dusty hillbilly hide... Over a sh*tbox truck. Better to go buy another and get to fixin. And the County knows that, too.

And also... Even if you were paid on contingency, and even if you won right off, YOUR end also exceeds the value of the truck.

I suppose this might stun you, and no offense meant, but most folks can't afford lawyers... Hell they can't even afford the bet, unless they are looking at hard time. It wasn't till I had a successful business that I had the shekels to afford lawyers and start covering my a**.

[Kamaji]

Right... Adding lawyer fees to the high cost of storage, that has already exceeded the value of the rig... If you lose, I mean... Which you likely will. It ain't like someone ain't already tried like that before. And I know you'd win on appeal, one way or the other... But all that would have to come out of my dusty hillbilly hide... Over a sh*tbox truck. Better to go buy another and get to fixin. And the County knows that, too.

And also... Even if you were paid on contingency, and even if you won right off, YOUR end also exceeds the value of the truck.

I suppose this might stun you, and no offense meant, but most folks can't afford lawyers... Hell they can't even afford the bet, unless they are looking at hard time. It wasn't till I had a successful business that I had the shekels to afford lawyers and start covering my a**.

That's why it needs to be a project with one of the nonprofit organizations that makes it their task to defend property rights.  And it could be a class action brought against a particularly notorious county or municipal facility.  Furthermore, if one brings the action under section 1983 for violation of constitutional rights, then an award of attorneys fees is also available.

One has to understand the tools available to one, and use them creatively.

[roamer_1]

That's why it needs to be a project with one of the nonprofit organizations that makes it their task to defend property rights.  And it could be a class action brought against a particularly notorious county or municipal facility.  Furthermore, if one brings the action under section 1983 for violation of constitutional rights, then an award of attorneys fees is also available.

One has to understand the tools available to one, and use them creatively.

And that leads back to affording a good lawyer, and all GOOD lawyers cost way too much... And 'good' should be in quotes... My business lawyer was an absolute dirtbag (bless his heart, and RIP), and far exceeded others in 'creativity'. And most of the time, the other guy paid his embarrassingly exorbitant fees. Mostly he cost me a bottle of good scotch, which I'd help him kill, out on his deck of an evening. And his main intern was a battleaxe... I miss them folks.

But to the point - a creative lawyer is well past the ability of an average Joe to afford, or he is really not all that creative.

[Kamaji]

And that leads back to affording a good lawyer, and all GOOD lawyers cost way too much... And 'good' should be in quotes... My business lawyer was an absolute dirtbag (bless his heart, and RIP), and far exceeded others in 'creativity'. And most of the time, the other guy paid his embarrassingly exorbitant fees. Mostly he cost me a bottle of good scotch, which I'd help him kill, out on his deck of an evening. And his main intern was a battleaxe... I miss them folks.

But to the point - a creative lawyer is well past the ability of an average Joe to afford, or he is really not all that creative.

It's not a question of going one on one - that is precisely what I just said - it has to be pursued the same way most constitutional law cases are pursued - by nonprofits committed to a cause.

It would be nice if you read what I'd actually written sometimes.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Storage charges, particularly if they go to the benefit of the government ultimately, may also be a grounds for challenge if the natural effect of the storage charges is to effect, as a practical matter, a taking of property without due process or compensation.

This.  And the Supreme Court isn't stupid enough to let that work as an end-around forfeiture.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

That's why it needs to be a project with one of the nonprofit organizations that makes it their task to defend property rights.  And it could be a class action brought against a particularly notorious county or municipal facility.  Furthermore, if one brings the action under section 1983 for violation of constitutional rights, then an award of attorneys fees is also available.

One has to understand the tools available to one, and use them creatively.

That's the key.  If it is the basis for a Section 1983 action, plenty of lawyers will line up to do that kind of work -- especially in the most egregious cases.

[roamer_1]

It's not a question of going one on one - that is precisely what I just said - it has to be pursued the same way most constitutional law cases are pursued - by nonprofits committed to a cause.

It would be nice if you read what I'd actually written sometimes.

Oh I did. I just don't have the faith you do in non-profit organizations, and even less in non-profit lawyers.
 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Oh I did. I just don't have the faith you do in non-profit organizations, and even less in non-profit lawyers.
 

1983 claims would be for-profit lawyers too, and some of those guys are really good.   And they only get paid if they win.

[corbe]

   Ironic, to me, that this is coming from a case that originated in Alabama because it was AG Sessions that put 'seizure' on Steroids and Trump went right along.  He became Perona non grata with his recusal from the Russian BS.

[Smokin Joe]

It's a typical trick in rural counties... Lost a truck in Browning (Blackfeet rez) and another in Lincoln county. In both cases, by the time the court stuff was settled, the cost of county storage far outweighed the value of the truck. I DID get the browning truck back with a well placed bribe in the dark of night... But I had to write the one in Eureka off.

I have been to Browning, and can see it might be amenable to a deal, and I know what you mean. I picked up a small van I'd loaned to my grandson. The wheel bearing, much like the ones on trains nowadays had seized. His friends swore they'd recover it but made excuses that were pure bull.
I found a day to go get it, a friend with a trailer and went for it. That turned out to be a bit of an adventure, and thankfully, I'd bought the vehicle very cheap, but it was the only day I had that the towing and impound fees and cost to get it would cost less that what I'd paid for it originally. After that it would have been harder to do. I bit the bullet and got the little van back (AWD) engine good, transmission good, etc, just a seized bearing hub ($100 part)--and my grandson found out that the people he'd considered 'friends' word wasn't worth the noise it made coming out of their mouths. I think that part was likely worth getting the little buggy back.

[roamer_1]

I have been to Browning, and can see it might be amenable to a deal, and I know what you mean. I picked up a small van I'd loaned to my grandson. The wheel bearing, much like the ones on trains nowadays had seized. His friends swore they'd recover it but made excuses that were pure bull.
I found a day to go get it, a friend with a trailer and went for it. That turned out to be a bit of an adventure, and thankfully, I'd bought the vehicle very cheap, but it was the only day I had that the towing and impound fees and cost to get it would cost less that what I'd paid for it originally. After that it would have been harder to do. I bit the bullet and got the little van back (AWD) engine good, transmission good, etc, just a seized bearing hub ($100 part)-- and my grandson found out that the people he'd considered 'friends' word wasn't worth the noise it made coming out of their mouths. I think that part was likely worth getting the little buggy back.

That might ought to be right 
Often youth is remiss in discernment. I hope he found a lesson.
And I am glad you got the van back with little loss of skin.