New Mexico outlaws civil asset forfeiture

https://www.aclu-nm.org/victory-new-mexico-governor-signs-historic-property-rights-protections-into-law/2015/04/

by hackercurious • 11 years ago

188 47 11 years ago

aclu-nm.org

Osiris• 11 years ago

Link to the bill: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/15%20Regular/final/HB0560.pd...

Here are the relevant details:

A. A person's property is subject to forfeiture if:

(1) the person was arrested for an offense to which forfeiture applies;

(2) the person is convicted by a criminal court of the offense; and

(3) the state establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the property is subject to forfeiture as provided in Subsection B of this section.

B. Following a person's conviction for an offense to which forfeiture applies, a court may order the person to forfeit:

(1) property the person acquired through commission of the offense;

(2) property directly traceable to property acquired through the commission of the offense; and

(3) any instrumentality the person used in the commission of the offense.

jabo• 11 years ago

Relevant John Oliver segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

venomsnake4• 11 years ago

Just entered to comment how much impact a spotlight from a single comedian could have. We should call it the cosby effect.

glibgil3• 11 years ago

I don't think Bill Cosby ever convinced anyone to pull their sagging pants up and besides, he might be a rapist.

tanderson922• 11 years ago

It has happened with major pieces of legislation a few times at least; another high-profile comedian well-acknowledged to have turned the tide of public discourse is Jon Stewart. His work on the daily show single-handedly ensured that the Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act was passed a few years back.

fit2rule• 11 years ago

I think you're attributing cause where none exists. The writers for these shows know what bills are up before the legislature and they time their broadcast accordingly, in order to perpetuate the notion of their participation in the zeitgeist. While I don't doubt that Oliver brought attention to the issue - it was more than likely in the pipeline for months before hand, which is why his writers put it on the 'current issues' stack.

WalterBright• 11 years ago

Thank you, New Mexico!

whoopdedo• 11 years ago

The concern I have with civil asset forfeiture is that the seized property goes directly to the sheriff. This gives the police a financial incentive to seize assets. Law enforcement is not an activity that should be conducted with a profit motive.

Even with limitations on what can be taken and when, I'd be more comfortable if it went into the state's general fund, or better a fund for recompensating victims of crime or accidents.

cmdkeen• 11 years ago

It's pretty similar to all these tiny city jurisdictions which finance significant portions of their revenue via fines, especially those that cover a couple of miles of major roads.

thaumasiotes6• 11 years ago

From the link (which you should check out):

Hampton[, Florida] has existed, for whatever reason, since about 1925. Home to fewer than 500 people, it is located east of Highway 301 in north-central Florida. Some would say, actually, that it is located on Highway 301, as a result of an amendment to the town's borders in the mid-1990s. See if you can spot the amendment on the map below:

I kind of wonder how this practice squares with the famous ideal of "no taxation without representation". What we have here is a town of <500 people who voted themselves the power to levy taxes on unrelated drivers passing not even through, but nearby. The drivers, obviously, were not consulted. Why is the town supposed to have this power in the first place?

Rumford2• 11 years ago

I'd argue that the profit motive is fine, private security works without this problem. The issue with asset forfeiture laws is that they create an incentive to violate the fourth amendment. The funny thing about this New Mexico law -- all it does is echo the Constitution. It shouldn't be necessary.

clavalle• 11 years ago

I'd argue that the profit motive is fine, private security works without this problem.

The payment incentive is very different for private security. They don't get to seize property.

The more relevant analogy would be privateers. Turns out they did have similar problems going off their assigned duties and sometimes dropping their charter altogether and just becoming pirates.

NoMoreNicksLeft3• 11 years ago

The evidence suggests this isn't a fix. Some states do have the proceeds of civil forfeiture go directly to the general fund... still abused.

Until recently, there was even the loophole of bringing the feds in, have them seize it, and then they'd give 90% back to the PD.

To some extent, this still works despite Holder's speech to the contrary. The AG has failed to reign in federal law enforcement agencies who refuse to follow the order given.

Civil asset forfeiture can't be reformed. Period. It has to be abolished.

thaumasiotes6• 11 years ago

Frankly, I think requiring that the property owner has to be convicted of a crime before the property can be seized qualifies as a real "reform".

dragonwriter• 11 years ago

The concern I have with civil asset forfeiture is that the seized property goes directly to the sheriff.

It usually doesn't; most state law forfeitures go to general funds, not the seizing law enforcement agency. Local agencies doing forfeitures under federal law were allowed to keep some of the proceeds directly, but these forfeitures have been curtailed (the asset sharing with agencies still exists, but the opportunities for locals to seize assets under federal law or have them "adopted" as federal seizures have been reduced.)

pluma2• 11 years ago

New Mexico has banned civil asset forfeiture and the death penalty and has legalized same-sex marriage.

Good to see at least some US states behave like they're in a first-world country.

blakeja2• 11 years ago

Not everyone agrees with your definition.

Igglyboo• 11 years ago

I'd say most people in the west do.

blakeja2• 11 years ago

Politically correct thoughtcrime / dissent = Downvote, I like it.

anonbanker• 11 years ago

And now I know where to store my assets. Thanks, HN!

New Mexico outlaws civil asset forfeiture

Related Stories