AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
of COLORADO

Denise S. Maes, Public Policy Director

FOUNDATION

June 5, 2017

(via e-mail to Kurtis.Morrison@state.co.us)
Governorlohn Hickenlooper

Office of the Governor

136 State Capitol Building

Denver, CO 80203

Re: 

Dear Governor:

More than three?fourths of the Colorado Legislature voted this session to protect due process
rights and to ensure that forfeiture actions in Colorado abide by Colorado law. The ACLU of
Colorado writes to strongly urge you to sign HB 17 1313, Civil Forfeiture Reform.

Nationwide and locally, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has long opposed civil asset
forfeiture. This practice allows police to seize and then keep or sell any property they
allege is involved in a crime. In 2002, Colorado lawmakers, in a bipartisan fashion, tightened
Colorado's civil forfeiture law and enacted greater due process protections for Coloradans. It
was clear then, and remains clear now, that Coloradans want and deserve greater due process
protections when individual?s assets are seized.

Federal law provides insufficient due process. For example, under federal law, property owners
need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be
taken away permanently by the government. The property that is seized need not be
instrumental to the underlying crime and if you?re an ?innocent owner? meaning you had
nothing to do with the crime you have to prove your innocence to the government. Colorado
law is different. Colorado law requires a conviction, proof that one is not an innocent owner,
and that the property seized was instrumental to commission of the underlying crime. Colorado
protects its citizens.

seeks to return the majority of Colorado civil forfeitures to the Colorado way.
Opponents of HB 1313 cite two arguments. First, they claim that the bill is a solution in search
of a problem and second, that the bill will somehow impede their ability to fight crime.

The first problem this bill attempts to resolve is clear. Currently, state and local law
enforcement can team up with federal agencies and bypass state requirements for due process.

303 17?h Avenue, Suite 350 Denver, CO 80203 720-402-3121 
A CL of Because Freedom Can ?t Protect Itself

Between the years 2000 and 2013, $47 million in assets were seized under federal law in
Colorado and, in 2014 alone, $13.5 million in Colorado assets were seized under federal law.
This means that in every single one ofthese forfeiture proceedings, Coloradans whose property
was seized were denied adequate due process. This alone is a problem. House bill 1313
addresses this problem by providing a clear incentive to have forfeiture proceedings with a net
worth of $50,000 or less be forfeited under state law; not federal law, thus ensuring greater
due process protections.

The second problem this bill attempts to address is how forfeiture proceeds are spent. Again, in
2002, Colorado lawmakers codified priorities for these proceeds. The priorities involve paying
outstanding liens, compensating victims, reimbursing local law enforcement agencies and
district attorney offices, and disbursing what remains 50% to the seizing agency to be spent for
legitimate law enforcement purposes and 50% to fund mental health and substance abuse
programs. C.R.S. When assets are forfeited under federal law, as has been
done to the tune of $13.5 million in one year alone, the seizing agency can keep up to 80% of
these proceeds and, regardless of how much the seizing agency gets, not one dime goes to the
priorities established by state lawmakers. By creating an incentive to have more forfeiture
proceedings go through state courts, HB 1313 honors the priorities in state statute.

Opponents argue that HB 1313 will make crime fighting more difficult because if there are less
forfeiture actions under federal law, local law enforcement agencies will get less money and,
therefore, not be able to fight crime. This position is untenable and frankly, I?m surprised this
argument is asserted with such vigor. Forfeiture was originally presented as a way to cripple
large-scale criminal enterprises by diverting their resources. This argument by the opponents
underscores the problem with forfeiture in that many police departments use forfeiture to
benefit their bottom lines, making seizures motivated by profit rather than crime-fighting.
Boiled down, what the opponents are asking you to do is to let them seize property whether or
not the property was instrumental in committing a crime and regardless ofthe guilt or
innocence of the person from whom the property was seized so they can supplement their
budgets to allegedly fight crime. This is not the purpose of forfeiture laws. This also constitutes
a work around the typical public budgeting process and puts law enforcement?s desire to
supplement their bottom line ahead of standard due process rights.

We ask that you reject the arguments set forth by the opponents of HB 1313. Forfeiture actions
in Colorado should abide by Colorado law. This bill returns us to the Colorado way and it?s a
way that better protects the due process rights of Coloradans.

Sin erely,

(mt-2?

Denise S. Maes

Public Policy Director

 
 

303 17lh Avenue, Suite 350 Denver, CO 80203 720-402-3121 
A Cl. of Because Freedom Can ?t Protect Itself