The Importance Of Civil Forfeiture Laws

Improved Essays
Constitutional rights have been a fundamental part of American society since 1791, when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The Bill of Rights includes ten amendments that were supposed to safeguard individual liberty. However, constitutional rights are very limited today. For example, the Patriot Act limits the rights found in the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Civil forfeiture laws limit the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The death penalty also limits the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment along with the right to equal protection under the law. All of these limits mean that individual liberties are not protected as they should be and that the government’s power is being …show more content…
Civil forfeiture laws allow police to seize, keep, and sell any property that they believe is involved in a crime (Asset Forfeiture Abuse). The owners of the property do not necessarily need to be arrested or convicted for their property to be taken away. This property could be money, cars, or even real estate. Forfeiture was originally created to crack down on large crime operations by cutting off their resources (Asset Forfeiture Abuse). However, today, instances of civil forfeiture are allegedly more motivated by profit than justice. In one court case, Cox v. Voyles, a woman had let her son borrow her truck, but police seized it because they had concluded that it had stolen parts (Cox v. Voyles). When the woman explained to the deputy who had seized the truck that it was not stolen and her son was innocent, the deputy simply told her that she would never get the truck back (Cox v. Voyles). There was no concrete evidence that the truck did in fact have stolen parts, but, the police seized it anyway and they reaped the profit. Cases like these center more on money to be gained than justice to be upheld. Civil forfeiture laws are a clear limit on the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and …show more content…
Miranda rights originated from Miranda v. Arizona, when the Supreme Court ruled that citizens arrested under state law must be informed of their constitutional rights against self-incrimination and to representation by an attorney before being interrogated while in police custody (Miranda v. Arizona). If a defendant has not been read their Miranda rights, any statements they make in an interrogation are inadmissible in court (Miranda v. Arizona). The requirement that Miranda rights be read before an interrogation protects a defendant’s rights to an attorney and their rights against self-incrimination. However, these rights do have limits. For example, law enforcement can question suspected terrorists without reading Miranda rights first (Perez). Miranda rights also do not need to be read if the defendant is not technically under police custody, or not technically being interrogated (Miranda v. Arizona). This means that the police can use anything a defendant says until they are under police custody and being interrogated, even without their Miranda rights read. This limits their Fifth Amendment rights to have an attorney and to not incriminate

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The Miranda Rights help protect citizens fifth and sixth amendments. The fifth amendment protects citizens from being forced to be witness against himself, while the sixth amendment assures that those arrested have a right to a public and speedy trial (Doc E). Together, the fifth amendment protects against self-incrimination and the sixth amendment assures that those arrested can not be held in jail indefinitely. The Miranda Warning read by officers specifically states that after one is made aware of their Miranda Rights, any confession or statements can be used against oneself lawfully (Doc J). Consequently, the Miranda ruling assures that one is fully aware of their rights and are also aware of the consequences if they choose to self-incriminate after being read their…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In a 5-4 decision for Miranda, it was ruled that anyone convicted must be told their rights, which we know refer to as Miranda Rights that must be told to anyone taken into custody. This is backed by the 5th Amendment. 5. Bush v. Gore 531 US 98 (2000) The petitioner was George W. Bush and the respondent was Albert Gore.…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Newton (2004) 369 F.3d 659; see Allen v. Roe (2002) 305 F.3d 1046 (where the objectively reasonable need be based on what the officer knew at the time of questioning); see also United States v. Jones (2001) 154 F.2d 617 (likewise, holding the public exception applicable where police knew the suspect had a firearm in the apartment unattended with children present). In determining the objectively reasonable need, courts consider whether the defendant might have or recently have had a weapon and that someone other than the police might gain access to that weapon and inflict harm. (United States v. Williams (2007) 483 F.3d 425.) Accordingly, Miranda warnings are not required where there’s an objectively reasonable need in protecting the police or public from immediate danger and statements stemming from custodial interrogation must not be…

    • 572 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Throughout all of American history, no other document has maintained an equally important and ever changing role in our government than the United States Constitution. The Constitution drew the plans for the creation the three branches of government and provided the structure on which the national government would grow. The most famous aspect of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. Written by James Madison as a response to the States’ demands that individual liberties be provided and protected, the Bill of Rights serves to establish the personal rights of every man in America. Among these rights are the right to counsel, which is preserved in the Sixth Amendment, and the right to not withstand or be subjected to cruel or unusual punishment,…

    • 1252 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    As our forefathers departed England to establish this new land, one of the original drivers was to allow many individual freedoms that were not allowed in England. Therefore, the U. S. Constitution was created to give the people freedoms that were not allowed in England and also to provide protections not provided for in their type of government. The tensions and conflict arose in the process of balancing the needs for individual freedoms with the need for the overall rule of law in the new nation. The difficulty is how individual rights are executed without the infringement on another person’s rights.…

    • 3876 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    When it comes to the United States Constitution, the first ten amendments are most generally known as the Bill of Rights. These specific ten amendments were brought to congress in the year of 1789. These amendments were intended to guard the American citizen’s rights, as well as their property (Laws, 2015). In addition, these amendments were supposed to decrease the amount of power that the government had over the people. These original amendments were affirmed in 1791 through the method of voting; however they had to be affirmed individually utilizing a three fourths superiority vote of each one of the states in America (Laws, 2015).…

    • 1347 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    You have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you" (" 'Miranda' Rights"). The law enforcement personnel must warn the individual prior to any investigation using the Miranda Warning. The Miranda rights are the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, which are stated in the Miranda…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The last miranda right is,do you understand the rights I have just read to you, with these in mind do you wish to speak to me, but if you do then just keep in mind that anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. Did you know the miranda rights have to do with the fifth amendment. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights and protects a person against being compelled to be a witness against himself or herself in a criminal case. The Fifth Amendment creates a number of rights relevant to both criminal and civil legal proceedings.…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Great Essays

    However, this only applies when the suspect is in custody. According to GetLegal.com, if both elements are not present, the police are not required to give Miranda warnings. Many landmark cases have addressed and debated over what the true meaning of "custody" and "interrogation," however the main definition to go by is that custody means to be arrested. Therefore, the standard a court will apply is objective as they give a fair choice, where they will ask whether the average person is aware of the circumstances and of their rights but would have felt free to leave the scene and remain silent. If the answer is no, the suspect is put in…

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    What is civil forfeiture? This law is a nationwide procedure; however, Mississippi is considered the worst for encouraging this abuse called policing for profit. It’s a law where police and prosecutors confiscate the private property of an individual who is allegedly suspected of an illegal drug activity but has never been convicted. “What (doth it) profit, my brethren, through a man say he hath faith, and have not works?” (James 2:14 KJV).…

    • 2228 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This case pointed out that the 5th and 6th amendment rights included in Miranda won´t apply if a person didn´t have the legal rights in the first place. I believe the supreme court decision in Salinas v. Texas was accurate because without being interrogated and in custody there is no legal rights for the officers to give a person their…

    • 757 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Civil Forfeiture is the loss of property to the government because the property is believed to have been associated with criminal activity. Under this law, civilians are not required to be charged with a crime to have their personal belongings seized by the federal government because it is an in rem action, meaning the trial is against their possessions, not the civilian personally. The members of the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the United States House of Representatives should place restraints on 18 US Code § 981, commonly known as Civil Forfeiture, because it is an unconstitutional law that allows corrupt police officers to take advantage of innocent citizens, it has proven to be exceedingly expensive and difficult to regain possession…

    • 1404 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Civil Forfeiture laws allow the government to gain a person’s personal property with only “clear and convincing” standard of proof rather than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of proof that is needed for a Criminal Forfeiture action. The property in question only needs to have a clear and convincing proof that it is connected to the alleged criminal activity presented. This “clear and convincing” standard of proof can be tainted as unlawful and therefore must be condemned. The Supreme Court has extended all the rights of the Fourth Amendment, the due process rights of the Fifth Amendment, and the Eight Amendment, in return has made them more frequently used by law enforcement. Does Civil Asset Forfeiture open the door for corruption?…

    • 149 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Many people see civil asset forfeiture as a defective tactic used by the government. Civil asset forfeiture refers to a legal procedure by which the government is able to seize and ultimately forfeit the property of people suspected of wrong doing. The reason why people see this tactic as execrable is the fact that the government can seize property from people who were never convicted of or charged with a crime. Civil asset forfeiture is constantly seen as a way the government can victimize innocent people to make a profit on seized properties. Although this is a rather harsh tactic it is an absolutely credible tool used by the government and law enforcement agencies.…

    • 1340 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The police question suspects and witnesses for two reasons, to gather information about the crime and to try to get a suspect to confess if they believe the individual is guilty. This is where Miranda rights are important. The Constitution guarantees certain rights including the following. The right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney, either one that is appointed by the state or one that is privately hired. To start with the first line of the Miranda statement “You have the right to remain silent”.…

    • 1883 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays