District of Columbia


Law Grade
State LawEvasion Grade  Final
District of Columbia
foutline foutline fsolid


Forfeiture Law
The District of Columbia’s civil-forfeiture statute not only represents a grave assault on private property rights, but it is also an affront to due process and the rule of law. Civil forfeiture is the power of law enforcement to seize and keep property suspected of being involved in criminal activity. Under civil forfeiture, police can take property without even charging the owner with a crime. Worse, in all but a handful of states, forfeiture proceeds fund law-enforcement agencies, giving them a direct financial incentive to abuse this power.Following the methodology of the Institute for Justice’s 2010 study evaluating forfeiture in the states,[1] D.C. earns F grades for its forfeiture laws and for the extent to which local law enforcement evades D.C. law by partnering with the federal government through its equitable sharing program. Like the worst states in IJ’s study, the District currently provides few protections for property owners and incentivizes forfeiture by returning 100 percent of the proceeds to the seizing agencies. D.C. also makes extensive use of the equitable-sharing loophole.The Civil Asset Forfeiture Amendment Act of 2013 (Bill 20-48) would bring about substantial improvement in four vital ways:1. Eliminates the Profit Incentive. Under the current statute, all proceeds from forfeited property go directly to fund law enforcement activities. This prospect of institutional gain threatens the impartial administration of justice by overzealous efforts on the part of law enforcement. The proposed bill removes this conflict of interest by directing the profits from seized property to a general fund, where Year elected officials decide how the money is spent. Significantly, the bill also directs forfeiture proceeds from the equitable sharing program to the general fund, eliminating the equitable-sharing loophole.2. Institutes a Prompt-Hearing Requirement. In 2012, 2002 a federal judge ruled that the District’s failure to provide a car owner with a hearing to challenge the seizure of his car violated due process.[2] This bill remedies this constitutional defect by providing property owners with a prompt and meaningful opportunity to contest the seizure of their property. Additionally, the bill eliminates the fee currently required to file a claim for the property.3. Increases the Government’s Burden to Prove Property Can Be Forfeited. Along with just eight states, the District of Columbia permits forfeiture by probable cause alone. The proposed bill increases this burden of proof. To forfeit real property like homes, the District must prove that the property is subject to forfeiture beyond a reasonable doubt. For all other property, the bill raises the standard to clear and convincing evidence.

4. Restores the Presumption of Innocence. The current statute requires owners to prove their innocence to recover seized property. This turns the presumption of innocence— a hallmark of the American justice system—on its head. The proposed bill remedies this travesty by placing the burden of proof on the District to establish that the person’s property is subject to forfeiture.

1 Marian R. Williams, Ph.D., Jefferson E. Holcomb, Ph.D., Tomislav V. Kovandzic, Ph.D., & Scott G. Bullock, Policing For ProFit: the Abuse oF civil Asset ForFeiture (Institute for Justice, 2010), available athttp://www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/other_pubs/assetforfeituretoemail.pdf.

2 Simms v. District of Columbia, 872 F. Supp. 2d 90 (D.D.C. 2012).


Forfeitures as Reported to LEMAS (Drug-related only)
 No data available


Equitable Sharing Proceeds to the District of Columbia


Proceeds Returned to State

FY 2000


FY 2001


FY 2002


FY 2003


FY 2004


FY 2005


FY 2006


FY 2007


FY 2008


FY 2009


FY 2010


FY 2011


FY 2012





Freedom of Information Data

Reports of forfeitures by law enforcement agencies










FY 2010







FY 2011







FY 2012















Learn how states were graded and how data was collected

Return to Policing for Profit main page