[Clips] Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime

[R.A. Hettinga]

--- begin forwarded text


  Delivered-To: rah at shipwright.com
  Delivered-To: clips at philodox.com
  Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 23:34:47 -0400
  To: Philodox Clips List <clips at philodox.com>
  From: "R.A. Hettinga" <rah at shipwright.com>
  Subject: [Clips] Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime
  Reply-To: clips-chat at philodox.com
  Sender: clips-bounces at philodox.com

  <http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/12/1296.asp>

  theNewspaper.com: A journal of the politics of driving


  Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime

  Back To Front Page


  8/19/2006

  Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime

  Eighth Circuit Appeals Court ruling says police may seize cash from
  motorists even in the absence of any evidence that a crime has been
  committed.


  A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that if a motorist is carrying
  large sums of money, it is automatically subject to confiscation. In the
  case entitled, "United States of America v. $124,700 in U.S. Currency," the
  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit took that amount of cash away
  from Emiliano Gomez Gonzolez, a man with a "lack of significant criminal
  history" neither accused nor convicted of any crime.

  On May 28, 2003, a Nebraska state trooper signaled Gonzolez to pull over
  his rented Ford Taurus on Interstate 80. The trooper intended to issue a
  speeding ticket, but noticed the Gonzolez's name was not on the rental
  contract. The trooper then proceeded to question Gonzolez -- who did not
  speak English well -- and search the car. The trooper found a cooler
  containing $124,700 in cash, which he confiscated. A trained drug sniffing
  dog barked at the rental car and the cash. For the police, this was all the
  evidence needed to establish a drug crime that allows the force to keep the
  seized money.

  Associates of Gonzolez testified in court that they had pooled their life
  savings to purchase a refrigerated truck to start a produce business.
  Gonzolez flew on a one-way ticket to Chicago to buy a truck, but it had
  sold by the time he had arrived. Without a credit card of his own, he had a
  third-party rent one for him. Gonzolez hid the money in a cooler to keep it
  from being noticed and stolen. He was scared when the troopers began
  questioning him about it. There was no evidence disputing Gonzolez's story.

  Yesterday the Eighth Circuit summarily dismissed Gonzolez's story. It
  overturned a lower court ruling that had found no evidence of drug
  activity, stating, "We respectfully disagree and reach a different
  conclusion... Possession of a large sum of cash is 'strong evidence' of a
  connection to drug activity."

  Judge Donald Lay found the majority's reasoning faulty and issued a strong
  dissent.

  "Notwithstanding the fact that claimants seemingly suspicious activities
  were reasoned away with plausible, and thus presumptively trustworthy,
  explanations which the government failed to contradict or rebut, I note
  that no drugs, drug paraphernalia, or drug records were recovered in
  connection with the seized money," Judge Lay wrote. "There is no evidence
  claimants were ever convicted of any drug-related crime, nor is there any
  indication the manner in which the currency was bundled was indicative of

  drug use or distribution."

  "Finally, the mere fact that the canine alerted officers to the presence of
  drug residue in a rental car, no doubt driven by dozens, perhaps scores, of
  patrons during the course of a given year, coupled with the fact that the
  alert came from the same location where the currency was discovered, does
  little to connect the money to a controlled substance offense," Judge Lay
  Concluded.

  The full text of the ruling is available in a 36k PDF file at the source
  link below.

  Source: US v. $124,700 (US Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, 8/19/2006)




  --
  -----------------
  R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
  The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
  44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
  "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
  [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
  experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
  _______________________________________________
  Clips mailing list
  Clips at philodox.com
  http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips

--- end forwarded text


-- 
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'