≡ Menu

J. Forfeiture of seized property

State v. Kirk J. Bergquist, 2002 WI App 39 For Berhquist: Steven H. Gibbs Issue: Whether the state’s refusal to return guns valued at between $5000 and $7,150, following conviction for disorderly conduct, violated the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause. Holding: ¶8. Although the term ‘forfeiture’ does not appear in this statute, our supreme court has… Read more

{ 0 comments }

City of Milwaukee v. Sammie L. Glass, 2001 WI 61, affirming 2000 WI App 252, 239 Wis. 2d 373, 620 N.W.2d 213 Issue/Holding: ¶19 Considering the aims and objects of a Wis. Stat. § 968.20 action and the procedure set forth in Wis. Stat. § 968.20, we conclude that Wis. Stat. § 968.20 establishes an in rem… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Carlos Perez, 2001 WI 79, reversing State v. Perez, 2000 WI App 115, 235 Wis. 2d 238, 612 N.W.2d 374 For Perez: R. Douglas Stansbury Issue/Holding: ¶1 … The issue presented is whether a person who is convicted of carrying a concealed and dangerous weapon under Wis. Stat. § 941.23 (1997-98) has ‘committed a crime… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. William W. Boyd, 2000 WI App 208, 238 Wis.2d 693, 618 N.W.2d 251 Issue: Whether forfeiture of the entire value of a $28,000 vehicle which transported a weapon used in a crime was excessive, especially in light of the maximum fine of $10,000 for the crime. Holding: Applying the proportionality test mandated by United States… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Forfeiture – Return of Seized Property

Leonard L. Jones v. State, 226 Wis.2d 565, 594 N.W.2d 738 (1999), affirming unpublished decision For Jones: Colleen D. Ball, Reinhart, Boerner, Van Dueren, Norris & Riesselbach. Issue/Holding: Procedure for obtaining return of property seized under Uniform Controlled Substances Act is outlined in two seemingly overlapping statutes, §§ 961.55 & 968.20. The former, part of UCSA, mandates that… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Forfeiture — Pre-existing Security Interest

State v. Robert E. Frankwick, 229 Wis.2d 406, 599 N.W.2d 893 (Ct. App. 1999) For Frankwick: Wendy A. Patrickus Issue/Holding: Frankwick’s truck was ordered seized and forfeited, per § 346.65(6), following OWI convictions. However, someone had perfected a lien, the day before the convictions, and the trial court voided the lien after concluding that it had… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Lance Terry Konrath, 218 Wis.2d 290, 577 N.W.2d 601 (1998), affirming unpub. decision For Konrath: Ralph A. Kalal Issue/Holding: Forfeiture statute § 346.65(6) authorizes a civil, remedial in rem proceeding, and is not facially unconstitutional; because the statute is civil, double jeopardy doesn’t apply; the proceeding provides sufficient notice to satisfy due process (with caution that… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Walter A. Kirch, 222 Wis. 2d 598, 587 N.W.2d 919 (Ct. App. 1998) For Kirch: Timothy J. Gaskell Issue/Holding: The federal courts continue to consider possession, title, control and financial stake when determining ownership under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7). … We therefore consider these factors when determining ownership for the purposes of §… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS