If enacted, SB1029 will amend the Hawaii Revised Statutes, specifically Section 712A, limiting the situations under which civil asset forfeiture can occur. This change will ensure that only in cases where a felony conviction has been secured against the property owner can their property be forfeited. The legislation also clarifies that property cannot be seized for actions committed without the owner’s knowledge or consent, further protecting innocent individuals. The net proceeds from forfeited properties would be directed to the state general fund, promoting transparency in the handling of such cases.
Summary
SB1029, introduced in the Hawaii Legislature, addresses the significant issue of civil asset forfeiture, a legal practice that allows law enforcement to seize property without a criminal conviction. The bill's preamble emphasizes the adverse effects of such practices on innocent citizens who can lose their possessions without ever being charged with a crime, highlighting it as a form of government-sanctioned theft. The bill aims to reform this process by establishing that property can only be forfeited if the owner has been convicted of a felony related to the seized property, thus reinforcing the principle of due process in property rights.
Contention
The legislation is expected to spark discussions on its potential implications for law enforcement practices and budgetary impacts. Proponents argue that it enhances justice for citizens by preventing the wrongful seizure of assets, while critics may express concerns regarding its effects on law enforcement's ability to address crime effectively. Additionally, the exclusion of animal forfeiture pending criminal charges reflects a nuanced approach, potentially addressing specific cases where animals are involved without infringing on due process rights related to other kinds of property.
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.
Requiring a criminal conviction for civil asset forfeiture and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that property is subject to forfeiture, remitting proceeds to the state general fund and requiring law enforcement agencies to make forfeiture reports more frequently.
Requiring a criminal conviction for civil asset forfeiture and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that property is subject to forfeiture, remitting proceeds to the state general fund and requiring law enforcement agencies to make forfeiture reports more frequently.
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.