Sunteți pe pagina 1din 2

Cluiles B. Biud` Fiye Cluiles B. Biud` Fiye Cluiles B. Biud` Fiye Cluiles B.

Biud` Fiye
Attoiney und Counseloi ut Luw Tle Niels Espeison Building
808 Tiuvis, Suite 808
Houston, Texus 77002
713.236-8700 Ollice
713.229-8031 Telecopiei
281.68S-7630 Cell
www.cluilesbliye.com
Raking It In Forfeiture Funds Making Up for Lean Budget Times
Asset seizures and forfeitures have long been used to supplement law enforcement budgets
across the country. But now, in lean economic times, those funds are becoming more and more
important.
In Pennsylvania, at a time of budget-cutting and belt tightening, at least one county account is
flush with cash as Northampton County District Attorney John Morganelli announced recently
that forfeitures and seizures of cash, cars and real estate related to drug arrests last year totaled
$283,000, the most in the county's history. The funds were funneled into county coffers through
direct cash grabs of $150,000 and real estate and car sales of $133,000, Morganelli said. The
record year came as a result of big busts in Bethlehem and Easton, according to Morganelli, and a
countywide crackdown on gang activity.
And, in North Providence, Rhode Island, the Police Department has received $900,000 in drug
seizure forfeiture funds by virtue of the United States Attorneys Office. Peter F. Neronha, the
United States Attorney for that district, announced in mid-June that the Police Department is one
of four law enforcement agencies in the area to share in $4.5 million netted by the U.S.
Attorney's Office as a result of the prosecution of a Chinese drug manufacturer, Genescience
Pharmaceutical Company, and its CEO for illegally marketing Human Growth Hormone in the
United States.
But, forfeiture funds augmenting law enforcement budgets have been in the news for years. As
far back as 2008, reporter John Burnett of National Public Radio (NPR) reported on the problem
of law enforcement agencies becoming addicted to forfeiture funds:
Federal and state rules governing asset forfeiture explicitly discourage law enforcement
agencies from becoming dependent on seized drug money or allowing the prospect of
those funds to influence law enforcement decisions.
There is a law enforcement culture particularly in the South in which police
agencies have grown, in the words of one state senator from South Texas, "addicted to
drug money."
Part of the problem lies with governing bodies that count on the dirty money and, in
essence, force public safety departments to freelance their own funding.
(See the story at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91490480 )
In March, 2009, Howard Witt wrote in an article for the Chicago Tribune, describing the
infamous practice in Tenaha, Texas, where the local police would stop motorists driving through
town and, after discovering that they were carrying large amounts of cash, would present the
motorist with the choice of either being charged with a crime or signing over their money, in
effect waiving their right to contest the police seizure of their property. From Mr. Witts article:
In some cases, police used the fact that motorists were carrying large amounts of cash as
evidence that they must have been involved in laundering drug money, even though
Guillory said each of the drivers he contacted could account for where the money had
come from and why they were carrying itsuch as for a gambling trip to Shreveport, La.,
or to purchase a used car from a private seller.
Once the motorists were detained, the police and the local Shelby County district attorney
quickly drew up legal papers presenting them with an option: waive their rights to their
cash and property or face felony charges for crimes such as money launderingand the
prospect of having to hire a lawyer and return to Shelby County multiple times to attend
court sessions to contest the charges.
While the Tenaha practice lead to some reforms of the asset seizure and forfeiture laws in Texas,
folks are routinely faced with the prospect of having their property seized based on no more than
an officers opinion that they must be engaged in criminal activity if they are carrying large
amounts of currency. Thats not fair, but, in light of the economic times and the budget crunches
facing law enforcement, one should expect this practice and be prepared to fight it.
The problem of law enforcement agencies becoming addicted to seizure and forfeiture funds
will not be solved unless and until all seized funds go into the state general revenue fund for use
in the general budget process. Unless and until the direct financial incentive for law enforcement
agencies to seize funds and seek forfeiture is removed, abuses will continue in the system.

S-ar putea să vă placă și