Law Grade
State Law Evasion Grade  Final


Forfeiture Law
In Louisiana, protection against wrongful forfeiture of assets by police is inadequate.  The state may forfeit your property by showing by a preponderance of evidence that the property is related to a crime and thus forfeitable.  A property owner must then show that he is innocent—that he did not know and could not have reasonably known of the conduct or that he acted reasonably to prevent the conduct giving rise to the forfeiture.Law enforcement is entitled to 80 percent of the value of property they seize in civil forfeiture actions.  Incredibly, the remaining 20 percent flows to the criminal court fund.  This would seem to blatantly violate the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution.  In Tumey v. Ohio,[1] the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a statutory scheme where a mayor, also sitting as a judge, received a share of the proceeds collected in court. Moreover, Louisiana officials are required to collect data on the use of forfeiture but did not respond to a request for that information.

1 Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510 (1927).


Forfeitures as Reported to LEMAS (Drug-related only)

Total Assets

Assets Forfeited per
Law Enforcement Agency














Equitable Sharing Proceeds from the Assets Forfeiture Fund (AFF)


Proceeds Returned to State

FY 2000


FY 2001


FY 2002


FY 2003


FY 2004


FY 2005


FY 2006


FY 2007


FY 2008




Average per Year



Freedom of Information Data
No Data Available; Required to Collect, But Did Not Respond to Request


Learn how states were graded and how data was collected

Return to Policing for Profit main page