The Mississippi Legislature Joint Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review PEER Committee TELEPHONE: (601) 359-1226 Woolfolk Building, Suite Sill-A 501 North West Street Jackson, Mississippi 39201 601 359-1420 Post Office Box 1204 Jackson, Mississippi 39215?1204 Iames A. Barber Executive Director The following is an assistance memo prepared by the PEER Committee staff in response to a specific legislative request. It is not a report of the PEER Committee, nor does it represent the individual or collective views of the PEER Committee members. A legislative assistance memo is the PEER staff?s best efforts to answer the questions posed within the time frame allowed and with the information sources available. Unless prior approval has been given, this memo will be distributed only to the requesting legislator(s) named below. To: Representative . Bak From: James Barber RE: Civil Forfeit Counties Date: July 15, 2016 Please find attached the judicial orders directing civil forfeiture of property that was rendered in calendar year 2015. We have obtained copies of the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics? Administrative Declarations forfeiting property to that agency. Unfortunately, these arrived only hours ago, and PEER staff has not had time to review them. We will review them this weekend and provide them to you on Monday. The following paragraphs discuss the judicial forfeitures attached. Methodology PEER staff sought judicial forfeiture information from the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) for forfeitures ordered in calendar year 2015. information came from two sources: filings that are included in the Mississippi Electronic Courts database (MEC), and the information that AOC receives separately from non-MEC courts. MEC Information AOC provided PEER staff with tWo sets of spreadsheets containing forfeiture information from MEC. One set contained forfeitures ordered in 2015 filed from earher years. The other set included civil forfeitures filed in calendar year 2015. From the latter set, PEER staff reviewed those forfeitures that were finally adjudicated in 2015. The MEC counties with ordered civil forfeitures in 2015 were: - Harrison Circuit and County Court; - Hinds Circuit and County Court; - Madison Circuit and County Court; - Rankin Circuit and County Court; - Tate Circuit Court; and, 0 Warren County Court. Copies of the orders and the spreadsheets from the Administrative Office of the Courts are included. Orders printed from database include only those that direct the forfeiture of property, generally vehicles and/or currency, to law enforcement agencies. Many of the cases that appear on the MEC printouts did not result in an order of forfeiture. Some of the cases were dismissed for want of prosecution, and in others, title or lien holders who had no knowledge or involvement in the activities of the party from whom property was seized, successfully asserted their rights to have the prOperty transferred to them. The form of forfeiture orders will vary from locality to locality. In many instances, the style of an order is ?Agreed Order" which is a form of settlement. In other cases, the court actually orders a dismissal of the case containing the terms of the settlement in the order of dismissal. In other cases, a dismissal will mention a settlement, but will contain no details. In some cases, when the property owner or lien holders fail to contest the forfeiture, a default judgment is taken. In instances where the forfeiture goes to trial, a final order resulting in forfeiture will be entered into the record. likewise, in some cases, after the hearing, a dismissal will be entered. In instances where the state or local law enforcement do not make their case or lien holders successfully challenge the forfeiture, the court will order the return of property to the named parties in the processing. Orders In order to retrieve the orders not available on the MEC database, PEER staff contacted the circuit or county court from which the order originated. The following counties and courts of origin were contacted to obtain the aforementioned orders: - Adams County Court; - Alcorn Circuit Court; - Attala Circuit Court; - Benton Circuit Court; Bolivar County Court; - Calhoun Circuit Court; - Coahoma Circuit and County Court; - Copiah Circuit Court; Covington Circuit Court; Desoto Circuit and County Court; - Forrest Circuit and County Court; - Green Circuit Court; - Grenada Circuit Court; Hancock Circuit Court; Itawamba Circuit Court; Jackson Circuit and County Court; Jefferson Circuit Court; Jefferson Davis County Court; Jones County Court; Lafayette Circuit Court; Lamar Circuit and County Court; Lauderdale Circuit and County Court; Lee County Court; Lincoln Circuit Court; Lowndes Circuit and County Court; Marshall Circuit Court; Monroe Circuit Court; Newton Circuit Court; Oktibbeha Circuit Court; Pearl River Circuit and County Court; Perry Circuit Court; Pike County Court; Prentiss Circuit Court; Simpson Circuit Court; Wayne Circuit Court; Wilkinson Circuit Court; Yalobusha Circuit Court; and, Yazoo County Court. There are still some outstanding orders from counties who are still tracking down the information and from counties with a large amount of forfeiture orders such as Jackson and Pearl River. As these orders come in, PEER staff will be sure to forward them on to the task Upon a cursory analysis of these orders, PEER staff notes that Agreed Orders tend to have the most potential for indicating possible abuse. This is because most Agreed Orders are entered into upon a settlement agreement in which the arresting authority receives some or all of the 3 forfeited property as a condition subsequent to some sort of agreement made between the arresting party and the defendant. As the arresting party often seizes a large amount of property or cash and many of these Agreed Orders stipulate that some or most of the said property or cash will be returned while some will be forfeited, a reasonable person might assume that the arresting party is using its authority to gain assets from an arrest by settling With the defendant. In order to better understand the circumstances behind the Agreed Orders received from several counties, PEER staff has requested additional documentation regarding the settlements leading to Agreed Orders. PEER staff is not purporting that all Agreed Orders are indicative of potential abuse of civil forfeiture procedure, but that these types of orders could potentially highlight Where abuse could possibly be occurring. Conclusion The attached orders should present an accurate picture of court-ordered civil forfeitures in calendar year 2015. Please let us know if there are any other items we can provide prior to the task force meeting next Wednesday. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ted Booth or me at 601?359-1226.