Timbs v. Indiana could open floodgates of asset forfeiture cases
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a case which could have a profound impact on the ability of states to seize the property of ordinary citizens.
The case, Timbs v. Indiana, is expected by some court watchers to continue the court's steely-eyed suspicion of state laws that concern the seizing of property allegedly associated with criminal activity.
Directly at issue in the case is whether or not the state of Indiana was justified in seizing plaintiff Tyson Timbs's 2012 Land Rover. Timbs, who has a history of opioid abuse, used the car several times in the process of selling heroin to undercover narcotics officers in Indiana. The third time he attempted such a sale, he was pulled over and arrested. The Land Rover, which contained no drugs and was worth some $31,000, was seized.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Wise drug dealers take the cash and buy gold jewelry rather than hold onto the cash. The jewelry is returned to the dealer whereas the cash if confiscated. The drug dealer can easily pawn the jewelry when he/she needs cash.
ReplyDeleteDid the Gestapo also confiscate his shoes, because he was wearing them, too??
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, like all highway robbers, the are only interested in cash, jewelry, and valuables.
Start shooting back.
Robbery at gunpoint without a charge or a trial by someone with a badge is robbery nonetheless.