Summary
The Louisiana Supreme Court held that a 2002 Chevrolet Trail Blazer was subject to civil forfeiture because the vehicle was used to conceal and transport cocaine, conduct falling within Louisiana's forfeiture statute. The court also held that the respondent's prior criminal acquittal did not preclude the subsequent civil forfeiture proceeding, which applied a lower preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient to establish by a preponderance that respondent used the Trail Blazer to conceal and transport cocaine in his possession, and that this use fell within the broad scope of La. R.S. 40:2604(2)(b).
- The criminal acquittal did not preclude the State from obtaining civil forfeiture because the forfeiture proceeding applied a less rigorous burden of proof.
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence established by a preponderance that the Chevrolet Trail Blazer was used or intended to be used to facilitate conduct giving rise to forfeiture under La. R.S. 40:2604(2)(b).
- Whether the respondent's acquittal in the related criminal case precluded the State from obtaining civil forfeiture of the vehicle under the lower preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (7)
- Hanks v. Entergy Corp., 06-0477, p. 19 (La. 12/18/06), 944 So. 2d 564, 578(followed)
- State v. Major, 03-3522, p. 8 (La. 12/1/04), 888 So. 2d 798, 802(followed)
- One Lot Emerald Cut Stones and One Ring v. United States, 409 U.S. 232, 235, 93 S. Ct. 489, 492, 34 L. Ed. 2d 438 (1972)(followed)
- State v. Cotton, 00-0850, p. 7 (La. 1/29/01), 778 So. 2d 569, 575(followed)
- Dowling v. United States, 493 U.S. 342, 349, 110 S. Ct. 668, 672, 107 L. Ed. 2d 708 (1990)(followed)
- State v. 2002 Chevrolet Trail Blazer, 11-1088, p. 10 (La. App. 4 Cir. 4/25/12), 91 So. 3d 487, 492(reversed)
- United States v. One 1976 Porsche 911S, etc., 670 F.2d 810, 812 (9th Cir. 1979)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…