State Law Evasion Grade

Minnesota law provides only slight protection for property owners against wrongful forfeitures, as its poor law grade of D shows.  The state’s somewhat higher final grade reflects limited use of equitable sharing to date (an evasion grade of B).  Although state statutes require that the government must show by clear and convincing evidence that the property is connected to drug trafficking and thus forfeitable, this burden is often easily met.  This is because, in practice, few cases are tried.  When they are, the owner is presumed guilty, bearing the burden of showing that he is an innocent owner.[1]  Law enforcement also receives as much as 90 percent of the value of forfeited property,[2] thus providing a profit incentive to law enforcement to focus on civil forfeitures instead of other law enforcement duties.  Nevertheless, as the numbers below indicate, Minnesota law enforcement has used forfeiture relatively modestly in recent years.

However, this changed in 2009.  Then, the consequences of Minnesota’s lax forfeiture laws were on full display with a scandal involving the state’s Metro Gang Strike Force, accused of using its forfeiture power to improperly seize property.  In some instances, officers have been alleged to keep the property for their own personal use.[3]

2 Specifically, 70 percent of the proceeds from common forfeitures go to the law enforcement agency, 20 percent go to the office of the prosecutor, and 10 percent go to the general governmental fund.  Minn. Stat. § 609.5315.

3 Lore, M. (2009, September 18). Criminal defense attorneys seek more protections in forfeiture cases. Retrieved September 25, 2009, from http://www.minnlawyer.com/article.cfm/2009/09/21/Criminal-defense-attorneys-seek-more-protections-in-forfeiture-cases.

State Press Release