Alabama’s Asset Forfeiture Law Not Impacted Following U.S Supreme Court Ruling in Indiana Forfeiture Case

by

A supreme court ruling in a civil asset forfeiture case.

It deals with a case in Indiana, but law enforcement officials around the country, including in Alabama, have followed it closely.

They’re wondering if it could impact their forfeiture laws.

Following a supreme court ruling in an Indiana forfeiture case some are questioning if Alabama’s asset forfeiture law could be impacted.  Barry Matson with the Alabama District Attorney’s Association says, no. Matson says Alabama has applied the excessive fines clause for 25 years.

“Police shouldn’t be able to seize your property without a valid reason. in Alabama there has to be. there has to be a nexus between the property that is seized and identified criminal activity that can be articulated or explained in court as to the connection,” says Matson.

Matson has been keeping a close eye on the case in Indiana where police seized a land rover from Tyson Timbs, after arresting him for selling nearing $400  worth of heroin. He says there have been some cases in the past, where the law has been applied incorrectly.

“I’ve seen some that i would disagree with the way that’s been done but i believe because of the proportionality rule that Alabama self-imposed 25 years ago. I don’t believe we have that in Alabama where we’re seizing large amounts of property or equipment or land or a house for a small amount of drugs. it has to be significant behavior,” says Matson.

He says asset forfeiture should be transparent.

“It should be fair to everybody involved and open and we’re for that. the DA’s in Alabama and I believe law enforcement are for that,” says Matson.