Small victory in asset forfeiture case

A postscript to our report a month ago about a Michigan man who had more than $17,500 in cash seized from him by police in Putnam County, Indiana on the grounds that he might be using it to buy drugs — never mind that they never even charged him with any crime, much less convicted him of it. After more than a year of fighting in the legal system, Anthony Smelley will get his money back.

Radley Balko, one of the editors of Reason magazine, has the details:

I don’t know that you could call it a victory, but last week, some 13 months after Putnam County took his money, Anthony Smelley learned he will finally get it back. Putnam County Circuit Court Special Judge David Polk ruled that the stop, detainment, and drug dog search of Smelley and his car were all legal. But Polk also determined that because the police found no drugs in Smelley’s possession and because the county presented no other evidence of illegal activity, it is obligated to return Smelley’s money.

Under Indiana law, Smelley will not be reimbursed for his time, interest on the money, court costs or attorney’s fees.

This is obviously preferable to a decision allowing the county to keep Smelley’s money. But it shows just what a rigged game the forfeiture racket is that it took 13 months, two judges, and a hell of a lot of hassle for Smelley to reach the same outcome he should have been granted the moment the police failed to find any contraband in his car.

In order for justice truly to be served, of course, there should be one very simple rule, a rule that would seem by any reasonable reading to be demanded by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: The government cannot seize your money or your property on the grounds that it was either gained by criminal activity or involved in criminal activity unless and until you are actually convicted for that crime.