Kentucky earns a D- for its civil forfeiture laws
Standard of Proof
Low bar to forfeit most property: In general, prosecutors’ standard is akin to probable cause (“slight evidence of traceability” to a crime), and the owner must prove by clear and convincing evidence that property is not connected to a crime. For real property, prosecutors’ standard is clear and convincing evidence.
Innocent Owner Burden
Limited protections for the innocent: Third-party owners must prove their own innocence to recover seized property unless real property is at stake.
Financial Incentive
Large profit incentive: 100% of forfeiture proceeds go to law enforcement (85% to the seizing agencies and 15% to the Office of the Attorney General or the Prosecutors Advisory Council).
The letter grade reflects Kentucky’s forfeiture laws as of May 7, 2025. 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.
Note: Prosecutors need only meet their standard of proof—and owners can only prove their innocence—if owners make it to a judicial hearing. See flow chart.
Recent Reforms
Recommendations
What happens after personal property is seized in Kentucky?
Under Kentucky law, prosecutors’ and owners’ deadlines leading to a judicial hearing add up to 41 days, but the wait may be longer as deadlines are not specified for filing or serving the complaint or for the hearing itself. While you wait, the government has your property, and you have no way to seek its return.
For research methods and limitations, see “How We Documented Civil Forfeiture Processes From Seizure to Hearing.”
State and Federal Forfeiture Proceeds, 2000–2023
At least $217 million in state and federal forfeiture revenue
| Year | Kentucky Forfeiture Revenues | Dept. of Justice Equitable Sharing Proceeds | Treasury Equitable Sharing Proceeds | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | Unknown | $2,497,441 | $35,000 | $2,532,441 |
| 2001 | Unknown | $4,938,459 | $94,000 | $5,032,459 |
| 2002 | Unknown | $2,691,400 | $355,000 | $3,046,400 |
| 2003 | Unknown | $2,233,489 | $156,000 | $2,389,489 |
| 2004 | Unknown | $3,886,825 | $211,000 | $4,097,825 |
| 2005 | Unknown | $3,441,424 | $1,460,000 | $4,901,424 |
| 2006 | Unknown | $5,621,490 | $254,000 | $5,875,490 |
| 2007 | $979,989 | $7,562,868 | $311,000 | $8,853,857 |
| 2008 | $805,911 | $5,865,895 | $783,000 | $7,454,806 |
| 2009 | $2,116,603 | $4,234,189 | $697,000 | $7,047,792 |
| 2010 | $1,850,887 | $4,845,652 | $460,000 | $7,156,539 |
| 2011 | $2,039,800 | $8,126,673 | $439,000 | $10,605,473 |
| 2012 | $2,038,917 | $5,125,641 | $846,000 | $8,010,558 |
| 2013 | $2,270,303 | $6,280,647 | $308,000 | $8,858,950 |
| 2014 | $3,217,098 | $5,154,616 | $1,728,000 | $10,099,714 |
| 2015 | $3,197,487 | $5,965,162 | $1,335,000 | $10,497,649 |
| 2016 | $4,915,588 | $4,390,196 | $1,814,000 | $11,119,784 |
| 2017 | $3,204,986 | $4,599,718 | $346,000 | $8,150,704 |
| 2018 | $5,512,007 | $9,484,449 | $980,000 | $15,976,456 |
| 2019 | $9,320,083 | $7,980,996 | $935,000 | $18,236,079 |
| 2020 | $5,216,360 | $3,589,987 | $449,000 | $9,255,347 |
| 2021 | $5,903,075 | $3,100,916 | $326,000 | $9,329,991 |
| 2022 | $7,225,670 | $5,683,136 | $333,000 | $13,241,806 |
| 2023 | $5,556,246 | $18,327,608 | $1,657,000 | $25,540,854 |
| Totals | $65,371,010 | $135,628,877 | $16,312,000 | $217,311,887 |
All revenue figures include both civil and criminal forfeitures. Revenues are not adjusted for inflation.
Federal Equitable Sharing
Kentucky does not prevent state and local law enforcement agencies from using the federal equitable sharing program to circumvent state forfeiture law. Since 2000, Kentucky agencies have generated nearly $152 million in equitable sharing proceeds from the departments of Justice and the Treasury. And on average from 2019 to 2023, 136 Kentucky agencies, or an estimated 40% of all law enforcement agencies in the state, were certified for the program.
Forfeitures Under Kentucky Law: Key Facts
Median Value
UNKNOWN
Kentucky property-level data necessary to calculate median forfeiture value were not used for this report.
Property Types
UNKNOWN
Kentucky property type data were not used for this report.
Proceeding Types
UNKNOWN
Kentucky does not report whether forfeitures are processed under civil or criminal forfeiture law.
Additional Findings
UNKNOWN
Agencies do not provide detailed data on seized or forfeited property, resulting in limited transparency into forfeiture activity in the state.
Forfeiture Transparency and Accountability Report Card
Tracking Seized Property
D-Statewide Forfeiture Reports
CPenalties for Failure to File a Report
AAccounting for Forfeiture Fund Spending
FAccessibility of Forfeiture Records
DFinancial Audits of Forfeiture Accounts
FFor full transparency and accountability grades, visit www.ij.org/TransparencyReportCards.
Data Notes
Statewide forfeiture reports were obtained via public records requests to the state Office of Drug Control Policy. Revenues represent the value of forfeited property awarded to law enforcement agencies in a fiscal year. Increased agency compliance with reporting requirements likely accounts for the increase in revenues over time, although a number of agencies still failed to report in the most recent data. Equitable sharing data are from DOJ’s and Treasury’s annual forfeiture reports. Due to differences in reporting and accounting practices, figures may not match aggregate numbers produced by the state or cover the same 12-month period as the federal data. The number of certified agencies was computed using the approved Equitable Sharing Agreement and Certification requests submitted by police, sheriff, and other local law enforcement agencies. The percentage of certified agencies was computed using that number and the total number of agencies reported in the 2018 Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies.
Legal Sources
Standard of proof: In general, the government need only show “slight evidence of traceability” to a crime, a standard akin to probable cause, at which point the owner must show the property’s innocence by clear and convincing evidence. The government’s standard of proof increases to clear and convincing evidence for real property.
Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 218A.240(5), 410(1)(j); Robbins v. Commonwealth, 336 S.W.3d 60, 64–65 (Ky. 2011); Gritton v. Commonwealth, 477 S.W.3d 603, 605 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015) (confirming this procedure generally applies to forfeitures of other personal property as well as of money).
Innocent owner burden: Depends on the property. Generally, the owner bears the burden of proof. But for real property, the government bears the burden.
Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 218A.410(1)(j); Robbins v. Commonwealth, 336 S.W.3d 60, 64–65 (Ky. 2011).
Financial incentive: 100% (85% to the law enforcement agencies seizing the property, 15% to the Office of the Attorney General or to the Prosecutors Advisory Council).
Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 218A.420(4).
Process: Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 218A.240(5), 410 (forfeiture procedure), 413.120 (statute of limitations); Ky. St. R. Civ. P. 4.01–4.04 (service of complaint), 12.01 (time to answer), and 55.01 (default judgment); Ky. Dep’t of Crim. Just. Training, Model Policy for Forfeiture of Assets by Law Enforcement Agencies (rev. 2020) (notice of seizure).