On Oct. 14, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Alvarez v. Smith, a case that presented a question of pressing importance to citizens and governments throughout the country. The issue was how much procedural due process is constitutionally required for persons whose property is confiscated by law enforcement agencies seeking its forfeiture to the government as the instrumentality or proceeds of a crime.
An Illinois drug forfeiture statute allows law enforcement to seize cars, drugs or cash purportedly involved in drug offenses and to hold the property for five months before even beginning a legal action. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ruled that due process requires some kind of a hearing promptly after seizure to enable the deprived owner to challenge the basis for continued retention of the property by the police.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
