Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civil Asset Forfeiture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate adopts amendment and advances SB87 to third reading after debate on forfeiture safeguards
Summary
Senate Bill 87, revising civil asset forfeiture procedures, was amended to extend prosecutorial response windows and provide a return-of-property mechanism if no response is filed; the amendment passed and the bill was advanced to third reading unanimously.
Senate Bill 87, addressing civil asset forfeiture revisions, was uncircled for debate and amendment on the Senate floor.
Senator Stahr opened discussion and noted an amendment (number 5) developed with stakeholders. Senator Endrick referenced a 2015 CCJJ report that identified concerns with the implementation of existing forfeiture law and said he had prepared an alternative substitute. He warned about broad prosecutorial discretion and the risk that individuals lack resources to challenge forfeiture: "Prosecutors... are benefiting financially without ultimately getting to a criminal conviction," he said, arguing for careful reforms.
Senator Thatcher described amendment 5, which extends an initial response deadline from 30 to 45 days for prosecutors and provides an automatic return of property if no formal prosecutorial response is filed on the merits. He said the change provides litigants more practical time while preserving a 30‑day goal for complaint responses. The amendment was moved and adopted by voice vote.
Floor discussion clarified burden of proof: the claimant bears the obligation to demonstrate ownership in a claim, while the prosecutor must still meet the civil standard (clear and convincing evidence) to show property is criminal proceeds or was used to facilitate criminal activity. Senator Thatcher waived summation and the Senate moved the amended bill for third reading. The roll call recorded 29 yea, 0 nay, 0 absent on the motion to read for a third time.
