NCJ Number
85645
Journal
Criminal Justice Journal Volume: 5 Issue: 1 Dated: (Fall 1981) Pages: 1-31
Date Published
1981
Length
31 pages
Annotation
This article considers theories supporting warrantless seizures of property for forfeiture, warrantless searches made subsequent to valid searches for forfeiture, and seizures violative of the fourth amendment as a bar to forfeiture.
Abstract
The lack of consistency in court opinions dealing with seizures or forfeitures is primarily the result of confusion in the courts over the different situations presented to them. This confusion stems not only from the many different fact patterns and statutes the courts must evaluate but also from confusion over how to handle the varying challenges made to the seizure itself. The impact upon the ultimate forfeiture of a constitutional violation at seizure appears the most settled. The near uniform rule is that a constitutional violation at seizure will not defeat the forfeiture if evidence independent of the seizure supports the forfeiture. The only problem with this approach is that the manner of seizure is ignored, something which the fourth amendment was enacted to regulate. When evidence is discovered as a result of the proper seizure for forfeiture, the courts uniformly hold that the evidence is admissible. Differences among the courts arise when the claim is made that an item offered into evidence should be excluded on the ground that it was found as a result of an improper seizure for forfeiture. The best court interpretation in such a circumstance is that of United States v. McCormick, where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared the fourth amendment applies to seizures for forfeiture and that, absent some recognized exception to the warrant requirement, warrantless seizures of property for forfeiture will not be upheld. A total of 146 footnotes are listed.