Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06271989 - 1.87 1 -087 TO: Board of Supervisors - FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator DATE:` June 20, 1989 Sp'q.cou SUBJECT: LEGISLATION AMENDING STATUTES RELATING TO THE FORFEITURE OF ASSETS SEIZED AS A RESULT OF DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS Specific Request(s) or Recommendations(s) & Background & Justification RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge receipt of report from the County Administrator setting forth changes made by the Legislature relating to the distribution of the proceeds from the sale of property seized as a result of drug-related arrests. BACKGROUND: During the 1988 legislative session the Board took a position in support two pieces of legislation which proposed to change the distribution of the proceeds from the sale of property seized as a result of drug-related arrests. The County Administrator was asked to advise the Board at a later date of the changes that were approved by the Legislature. The Board supported AB 4162 (Katz) and AB 4271 (Wright & Harris) but declined to take a position on a third bill, AB 4523 (Moore). AB 4523 (Moore)was passed by the Legislature but was vetoed by the Governor. AB 4271 (Wright&Harris) was held under submission by the Senate Appropriations Committee and died there at the end of the 1988 session. AB 4162 (Katz) was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor as Chapter 1492, Statutes of 1988. Chapter 1492 became effective January 1, 1989. What follows is an analysis of the major changes made by Chapter 1492. 1. Add computers, computer programs and software which are used or intended for use in violation of the controlled substance statutes as property which may be seized and forfeited. Continued on attachment: YES Signature: f/" Z �e L4Z� _� x Recommendation of County Administrator Recommendation of Board Committee Approve �Q� p Other: Signature(s):-- Action of Board on: .lune 27 . 1989 Approved as Recommended x Other Vote of Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN X Unanimous (Absent -- ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE Ayes: Noes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN. Absent: Abstain: Attested June 27 , 1989 cc: County Administrator Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board District Attorney of Supervisors and County Administrator Sheriff-Coroner Director,Justice Systems Programs B /� (' Deputy Clerk Health Services Director y �— p y Mental Health Director CLVM:eh(forfetbo) 2. Limits to $10,000 the interest in a vehicle which may be driven on the highway with a class 3 or 4 license which may be excluded from being subject to forfeiture where an individual who had a community property interest with the defendant in the vehicle is the registered owner of the vehicle, was unaware of the unlawful use of the property and where this is the only class 3 or 4 vehicle available to the registered owner's immediate family. Prior law provided no limit on the value of the vehicle which could be exempted and did not require that the person claiming the exemptionbe the registered owner of the vehicle. In addition,Chapter 1492 allows the exemption to be waived if the judge or jury find that the individual claiming the exemption knew or should have known of the unlawful use of the vehicle. 3. Limits the value of real property used as a family residence which may be exempted from forfeiture to $100,000 where the property is owned by two or more persons, and includes real property related to specified drug violations, regardless of whether not those violations are charged. The exemption would be waived if the judge or jury find that the other ownerknew or should have known of the illegal activity involving the real property. Prior law placed no limit on the value of the real property which could be exempted and required that the defendant be convicted of the specified charges before the real property could be forfeited. 4. Expands the types of property the title to which vests in the state upon commission of any act which gives rise to a forfeiture under the controlled substance statutes. Prior law limited this section to personal property and provided a number of exceptions and conditions, all of which are eliminated by Chapter 1492. 5. Adds to the list of items of value which are not to be destroyed by a law enforcement agency upon forfeiture containers used to hold the controlled substance, records, research products and materials, computers, computer programs and software. 6. Add to the requirement that a receipt be issued to the individual in possession of the premises at which property was seized that if the individual is not present, the receipt shall be left in a prominent place at the premises. 7. Adds the Attorney General and district attorney to the law enforcement agency which made the seizure as agencies which are required to make an investigation into any right, title, interest or lien regarding a vehicle, boat or airplane which is seized and requires them to notify the legal owner of such property where the legal owner is other than the registered owner. 8. Reduces the burden of proof on the prosecution in showing that certain property was involved in the criminal activity from"beyond a reasonable doubt"to"a preponderance of the evidence". 9. Eliminates the need to have convicted a defendant of an offense which made the property subject to forfeiture in order to obtain a judgment of forfeiture if the offense occurred within five years of the seizure or within five years of the notification of intention to seek forfeiture. 10.Increases the value of personal property which the Attorney General or district attorney may order subject to forfeiture from $25,000 to $100,000. 11.Under prior law, after an innocent purchaser or mortgagee is reimbursed for his or her interest in the forfeited property and after the state or local agency is reimbursed for its costs in connection with the sale of the property the balance is distributed as follows: 65% to the law enforcement agencies involved in the seizure. 10% to the agency which prosecuted the forfeiture action. - 2 - 20% to the State Department of Mental Health for primary prevention programs. 5% to eligible nonprofit organizations established for the purpose of aiding those seizures and forfeitures. Under Chapter 1492, this distribution is altered as follows: 76.5% to the law enforcement agencies involved in the seizure. 13.5% to the agency which prosecuted the forfeiture action. 10% to be deposited in the Asset Forfeiture Distribution Fund, from which $1.5 million is appropriated each fiscal year to the State Department of Mental Health for primary prevention programs. Following that appropriation, $1.0 million is appropriated for 1989 and 1990 to the Los Angeles County Office of Education for a Gang Risk Intervention Pilot Program. After this appropriation is funded, not more than 5% of the Asset Forfeiture Distribution Fund may be appropriated to the Office of Criminal Justice Planning for their administrative costs in handling the Asset Forfeiture Distribution Fund. If there is any balance after the above appropriations have been made,85%of the balance is appropriated to the Peace Officers'Training Fund to provide drug related training to full-time peace officers employed by the state. Thereafter, 15% of the balance is appropriated for financial assistance to provide for a statewide program of education,training and research for local public prosecutors which shall be administered by a private nonprofit organization composed of local prosecutors and which provides statewide education, training and research.