United States of America vs $124,700
If you are planning to travel cross country with a large sum of cash, make sure it's in a new car and the money is in new bills.
While this guy and his friends were traveling cross-country in a rental car, they got pulled over for speeding. The officer requested and obtained permission to search the car. In a cooler, the officer found $124,700. A drug sniffing dog, Rico, found traces of drugs on the money and the money was confiscated.
The gentlemen were not charged, but the money has not been returned. The case was just heard at the 8th circuit apellate court. The court found that the government had a right to confiscate and keep the money because it was used in a drug transaction. Even though the guys they confiscated the money from were not charged with participating in any drug transactions.
Here's what I don't get. The money was the defendent. Apparently, if something was used in the commission of a crime and there is a dispute as to whether the government can keep it, that something becomes the defendent. The money was found "guilty" of being an accessory to a crime because there were traces of drugs on it. And this can happen for anything.
The government then hold sales to auction off seized property. So you can buy a used car, drive cross country, get pulled over and get the car confiscated because Rico found traces of drugs. You don't get charged with a crime, but the car is suspect. You lose your car. There is no compensation. But you might be able to re-buy the car at the next government auction.
I guess there is a silver lining.
While this guy and his friends were traveling cross-country in a rental car, they got pulled over for speeding. The officer requested and obtained permission to search the car. In a cooler, the officer found $124,700. A drug sniffing dog, Rico, found traces of drugs on the money and the money was confiscated.
The gentlemen were not charged, but the money has not been returned. The case was just heard at the 8th circuit apellate court. The court found that the government had a right to confiscate and keep the money because it was used in a drug transaction. Even though the guys they confiscated the money from were not charged with participating in any drug transactions.
Here's what I don't get. The money was the defendent. Apparently, if something was used in the commission of a crime and there is a dispute as to whether the government can keep it, that something becomes the defendent. The money was found "guilty" of being an accessory to a crime because there were traces of drugs on it. And this can happen for anything.
The government then hold sales to auction off seized property. So you can buy a used car, drive cross country, get pulled over and get the car confiscated because Rico found traces of drugs. You don't get charged with a crime, but the car is suspect. You lose your car. There is no compensation. But you might be able to re-buy the car at the next government auction.
I guess there is a silver lining.