I ran across this article from Grits for Breakfast
Require criminal conviction for asset forfeiture
Sen. Konni Burton filed legislation that would void asset forfeiture proceedings if prosecutors failed to secure an underlying conviction.
It brought a couple of things to mind. While reading about William Wayne Justice I have often thought if the Texas Prison system had taken care of their business, the Ruiz decision might have gone differently. The very reason for the decision is TDC did not.
In an article by Radio Legendary People V. 2011 BMW 535-I details a seizure that fits both the proposed law and my thoughts on the Judge.
I believe asset forfeiture laws are an important tool to fight crime. History shows most of the bad laws come from failing to take care of business. In the BMW case, the stated reason for seizure alleged the vehicle was purchased with proceeds of a felony crime. The problem becomes evident on review of the court documents. Evidence to support the seizure details the vehicle was used in the commission of a felony offense with a total lack of any evidence to support the vehicle was purchased with proceeds of crime as alleged in the filing.
Close enough for government work? Apparently so. Consider though, when two Baylor University employees recently entered pleas in a DWI case, their attorney petitioned the court to dismiss charges due to double jeopardy after the court clerk discovered a date was missing from the court documents. Apparently the clerk was on vacation when the vehicle was awarded to the State.
The legislation offered by Senator Burton strikes a reasonable compromise, perhaps even a necessary one. While there are far more egregious cases involving asset forfeiture, the reality is, the system is responsible for greater restrictions on how the job is done.
