Arizona 2022 Regular Session

Arizona House Bill HB2695

Introduced

2/7/22

Report Pass

2/16/22

Report Pass

2/21/22

Engrossed

2/24/22

Report Pass

3/10/22

Report Pass

3/14/22

Enrolled

4/7/22

Passed

4/13/22

Chaptered

4/13/22

Passed

4/13/22

Caption

Forfeiture; substitute assets; postdeprivation hearing

Impact

The proposed changes in HB 2695 are significant as they aim to improve the legal framework surrounding civil asset forfeiture. By instituting a requirement for postdeprivation hearings, the bill provides a mechanism for individuals to contest the loss of their property in a timely and fair manner. Additionally, the bill empowers innocent owners by defining their rights in forfeiture proceedings, potentially preventing wrongful seizures and upholding property rights. Overall, these reforms may lead to a more equitable application of forfeiture laws and increased accountability for law enforcement agencies involved in property seizures.

Summary

House Bill 2695 seeks to amend existing Arizona Revised Statutes concerning civil forfeiture processes. The primary goal of this bill is to introduce provisions for postdeprivation hearings, allowing individuals to claim an interest in seized property within a specified timeframe after the seizure. The bill underscores the rights of alleged innocent owners by establishing a clear process for property return unless the state can prove that the owner was involved or had knowledge of the illegal conduct that led to the seizure. These amendments aim to balance the interests of law enforcement in addressing crime with the protection of individual rights regarding property ownership.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 2695 appears to be largely positive, particularly among civil rights advocates and organizations dedicated to criminal justice reform. Supporters appreciate the bill's focus on protecting innocent individuals from losing their property without just cause. However, there may also be concerns from law enforcement that the bill could complicate the enforcement of forfeiture laws, as the added requirements for hearings could delay or hinder their efforts to combat crime. This creates a nuanced discussion about the balance between public safety and individual rights.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding HB 2695 may include the views on how these changes affect the operational capabilities of law enforcement. Critics from law enforcement might argue that the requirement for postdeprivation hearings could lead to challenges in their ability to detain assets related to criminal activities effectively. On the other hand, proponents argue that these protections are essential to prevent abuse of forfeiture laws. The bill reflects an ongoing debate in Arizona and across the nation regarding the intersection of legal processes, property rights, and law enforcement prerogatives.

Latest HB2695 Activity

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

HI SB149

Relating To Property Forfeiture.

LA SB359

Provides for civil forfeiture reform. (8/1/22)

HI HB1965

Relating To Property Forfeiture.

AZ HB2324

Forfeiture; digital assets; reserve fund

KS SB458

Specifying that certain drug offenses do not give rise to forfeiture under the Kansas standard asset seizure and forfeiture act, providing limitations on state and local law enforcement agency requests for federal adoption of a seizure under the act, requiring probable cause affidavit filing and review to commence forfeiture proceedings, increasing the burden of proof required to forfeit property to clear and convincing evidence, authorizing courts to order payment of attorney fees and costs for certain claimants and requiring the Kansas bureau of investigation to submit forfeiture fund financial reports to the legislature.

KS HB2606

Specifying that certain drug offenses do not give rise to forfeiture under the Kansas standard asset seizure and forfeiture act, requiring courts to make a finding that forfeiture is not excessive, restricting actions prior to commencement of forfeiture proceedings, requiring probable cause affidavit filing and review to commence proceedings, increasing the burden of proof required to forfeit property to clear and convincing evidence and authorizing courts to order payment of attorney fees and costs for certain claimants.

KS HB2380

Requiring a criminal conviction for civil asset forfeiture, remitting proceeds from civil asset forfeiture to the state general fund, increasing the burden of proof required to forfeit property, making certain property ineligible for forfeiture, providing persons involved in forfeiture proceedings representation by counsel and the ability to demand a jury trial and allowing a person to request a hearing on whether forfeiture is excessive.

HI HB126

Relating To Property Forfeiture.