SoylentNews

Texas Court: No Remedy for Person Whose Vehicle was Subjected to Civil Forfeiture

posted by n1 on Friday July 22 2016, @08:55AM   
from the many-interpretations-to-be-had dept.

MrPlow writes:

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

A bizarre case comes out of the Texas court system -- landing squarely in the middle of a legal Bermuda Triangle where illegal searches meet civil asset forfeiture... and everything is still somehow perfectly legal. (via FourthAmendment.com)

[...] The Supreme Court of Texas examines the facts of the case, along with the applicable statutes, and -- after discarding a US Supreme Court decision that would have found in Herrera's favor -- decides there's nothing he can do to challenge the seizure. He can't even move to suppress the evidence uncovered following the illegal stop -- the same search that led to the state seizing his vehicle under civil forfeiture statutes.

[...] First, the court decides that the deterrent effect of suppressing the evidence is outweighed by the cost to society.

[...] The court moves on to dismiss the Supreme Court's 1965 decision (One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania), suggesting not only that things have changed too much over the past 50 years to consider it relevant, but also -- unbelievably -- that the seizure of a person's assets via civil forfeiture is not a form of punishment.

[...] By finding no remedy workable or worthwhile in the face of societal cost, the Texas Supreme Court has given law enforcement another way to salvage evidence obtained by illegal searches: simply seize the "container" (house, car, boat, etc.) the evidence was discovered in.

As defense attorney John Wesley Hall notes in his post on the case, this decision will also encourage more questionable asset forfeitures because the court here has declared it's unwilling to entertain notions of deterrence when dealing with "non-punitive" civil seizures.

Source: TechDirt

---

Original Submission

• Re:Sounds so Russian Re:Sounds so Russian (Score: 3, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Friday July 22 2016, @02:28PM

  by LoRdTAW (3755) on Friday July 22 2016, @02:28PM (#378524) Journal

  The real reason they haven't gotten to the gulags yet is that they've learned that a non-imprisoned labor force is cheaper and more productive.

  In other words, we are already imprisoned through labor devaluation, inflation, and high cost of living.

  The end game of extreme capitalism isn't much different from extreme socialism/communism. Everyone is equally poor, works for and worships a minority elite. The methods to get to those goals are just different. At least communism is honest about its intent. They just take all your shit away up front instead of slowly fooling you into thinking you just need to work harder for that carrot.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+1
  Insightful=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Insightful' Modifier		0
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		3

• Re:Sounds so Russian Re:Sounds so Russian (Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Friday July 22 2016, @02:34PM

  by Thexalon (636) on Friday July 22 2016, @02:34PM (#378529)

  John Kenneth Galbraith said it perfectly: "Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."

  --
  The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.

  Parent

  • Re:Sounds so Russian (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Friday July 22 2016, @02:47PM

    by LoRdTAW (3755) on Friday July 22 2016, @02:47PM (#378541) Journal

    Thanks for that tidbit. Just did a little research on the man and found another great quote from him in 2002 (from wikipedia):

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

    Parent