New Hampshire
Policing for Profit
New Hampshire earns a D for its civil forfeiture laws.
Higher bar to forfeit in limited cases: Weak conviction provision falls short of criminal forfeiture (see “The Problem with ‘Conviction Requirements’”). It purports to require conviction of the owner but also makes it the owner’s burden to prove their own innocence. The standard by which property must be linked to a crime following a conviction is unclear.
Poor protections for the innocent: Third-party owners must prove their own innocence to recover seized property.
Large profit incentive: 90% of forfeiture proceeds go to law enforcement (45% to local law enforcement up to $225,000 from a single forfeiture and 45% to the state drug forfeiture fund; any amount above $1 million in the state drug forfeiture fund goes to the state general fund).
The letter grade reflects the state’s forfeiture laws as of December 2020. When we become aware of relevant reforms, we are updating the standard of proof, innocent owner burden and financial incentive language above, but we are not updating the letter grade.
Recent Reforms
- (2018) SB 498: Strengthened transparency requirements.
- (2016) SB 522: Purported to raise standard of proof; created weak conviction provision; strengthened transparency requirements; abolished administrative forfeiture.
Recommendations
- End civil forfeiture
- Direct all forfeiture proceeds to a non-law enforcement fund
- Strengthen protections for innocent third-party owners
- Close the equitable sharing loophole
- Strengthen transparency and accountability requirements
State and Federal Forfeiture Revenues, 2000-2019
Between 2000 and 2019, New Hampshire law enforcement agencies forfeited nearly $3 million under state law and generated an additional $24 million from federal equitable sharing, for a total of at least $27 million in forfeiture revenue. New Hampshire ranks 11th for its participation in the Department of Justice’s equitable sharing program. The state does not prevent state and local agencies from using equitable sharing to circumvent state forfeiture law.
At least $27 million in state and federal forfeiture revenue
2000–2019
| Year | New Hampshire Forfeiture Revenues | Dept. of Justice Equitable Sharing Proceeds | Treasury Equitable Sharing Proceeds |
$0 ↦
$2,254,994
|
Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | $63,237 | $346,243 | $0 | $409,480 | |
| 2001 | $455,552 | $0 | $455,552 | ||
| 2002 | $250,507 | $728,182 | $854,000 | $1,832,689 | |
| 2003 | $882,749 | $0 | $882,749 | ||
| 2004 | $281,636 | $806,361 | $0 | $1,087,997 | |
| 2005 | $1,271,291 | $0 | $1,271,291 | ||
| 2006 | $142,000 | $1,301,766 | $55,000 | $1,498,766 | |
| 2007 | $1,334,732 | $14,000 | $1,348,732 | ||
| 2008 | $97,000 | $1,072,645 | $119,000 | $1,288,645 | |
| 2009 | $573,046 | $282,000 | $855,046 | ||
| 2010 | $131,800 | $1,071,941 | $481,000 | $1,684,741 | |
| 2011 | $1,476,115 | $159,000 | $1,635,115 | ||
| 2012 | $184,853 | $2,006,141 | $64,000 | $2,254,994 | |
| 2013 | $1,482,392 | $1,000 | $1,483,392 | ||
| 2014 | $103,978 | $1,935,116 | $11,000 | $2,050,094 | |
| 2015 | $109,446 | $792,359 | $7,000 | $908,805 | |
| 2016 | $277,280 | $1,703,693 | $30,000 | $2,010,973 | |
| 2017 | $232,186 | $1,016,285 | $1,000 | $1,249,471 | |
| 2018 | $570,127 | $1,083,222 | $24,000 | $1,677,349 | |
| 2019 | $469,043 | $642,011 | $22,000 | $1,133,054 | |
| Totals | $2,913,093 | $21,981,842 | $2,124,000 |
State
Department of Justice
Treasury
|
$27,018,935 |
New Hampshire Forfeiture Transparency and Accountability Report Card
| D | Tracking Seized Property |
|---|---|
| F | Accounting for Forfeiture Fund Spending |
| A | Statewide Forfeiture Reports |
| A | Accessibility of Forfeiture Records |
|---|---|
| F | Penalties for Failure to File a Report |
| F | Financial Audits of Forfeiture Accounts |
Forfeitures Under New Hampshire Law: Key Facts
Median Value
UnknownNew Hampshire does not report property-level data necessary to calculate median forfeiture value.
Property Types
UnknownNew Hampshire does not report the types of property forfeited.
Civil vs. Criminal
UnknownNew Hampshire does not report whether forfeitures are processed under civil or criminal forfeiture law.
Expenditures
UnknownNew Hampshire does not report how forfeiture funds are spent.
Data Notes
Biennial reports of fiscal years 2001 through 2013 were obtained from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s website and via public records request to the AG. Figures represent forfeited money and proceeds from sales of forfeited property. Figures for fiscal years 2014 through 2019 are from reports on the New Hampshire General Court website. Figures represent revenue deposited to the state’s Drug Forfeiture Fund. They include maintenance costs and may include restitution. Equitable sharing data are from DOJ’s and Treasury’s annual forfeiture reports. Due to differences in reporting and accounting practices, state figures may not match aggregate numbers produced by the state or cover the same 12-month period as the federal data.
Legal Sources
Standard of proof: Weak conviction provision that purports to require an owner’s conviction but also makes it the owner’s burden to prove innocence. The provision was enacted in 2016 and has not been definitively interpreted by the New Hampshire courts. It is unclear whether the standard of proof to link property to the crime, after the conviction provision is satisfied, is preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence.
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 318-B:17-b(IV)(b), (d), 617:1-a(I). Compare id. § 318-B:17-b(IV)(b) (preponderance for drug forfeitures) with id. § 617:1-a(III) (clear and convincing for all forfeitures).
Innocent owner burden: Owner.
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 617:4-a, 318-B:17-b(IV)(b).
Financial incentive: 90% (45% to local law enforcement, 45% to the state drug forfeiture fund), with caps. Local law enforcement can keep no more than $225,000 from a single forfeiture, and amounts in the state drug forfeiture fund above $1,000,000 must be turned over to the state general fund.
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 318-B:17-b(V).