Couple To Lose Their Home in Michigan Civil Forfeiture?

policy

 

The issue of civil forfeiture, particularly in Michigan, has given rise to more heated debates in recent years than most other ‘hot button’ topics. We’ve discussed this subject numerous times in the past, and have worked to keep you updated on proposed bills and changes in state law. But in this particular case, we would like to share with you a story about a case that it happening right now in Traverse City, where a couple is in danger of losing their home despite the fact that they haven’t been charged with a single crime.

 

Mary and Kenneth Paul Murray own a $262,657 home in Traverse City, where they live. If the Traverse Narcotics Team (TNT) gets their way, the house will soon be the property of the state or Grand Traverse County along with nearly $4,000 in cash that the police believe are “ill-gotten gains.” The logic behind this claim is that the Murray’s allegedly violated Michigan’s medical marijuana law by selling to people without legal, physician-granted prescriptions.

 

According to Traverse City law enforcement, the Murrays also made medical marijuana edibles, called “medibles” and sold them to customers, which is against the law. The accusation states that the couple used these illicit ‘weed‘ sales to buy their expensive home and to accumulate $3,863 in cash. That is why the police feel that they are justified in seizing these assets.

 

The seizures took place without criminal charges

Here’s where it gets complicated. In 2015, Kenneth pled guilty to two counts of delivering or manufacturing an imitation controlled substance in Wexford County. But in Grand Traverse County, where the couple’s home is located and where TNT has seized their property, there are not currently any charges against the Murrays. That means that the seizures took place without criminal charges and of course without a conviction.

 

According to TNT Detective Sgt. Randy Graham, the reason that the state uses civil forfeiture is “so that the criminals involved in the drug trade don’t benefit from their crimes financially.” While there may be some logic to that point, it seems that in order to be called a criminal, the government must first prove that you are one. That hasn’t happened to the Murrays in Grand Traverse County.

 

This is what has caused so much controversy when it comes to Michigan’s civil forfeiture laws. The fact that the state has the right to take property from it’s citizens without prosecuting them first, without convicting them of a single crime, is highly controversial. Once a forfeiture notice is served on the owner of the assets, the burden shifts to the owner to try to save their property. That can be very expensive. People usually resent having to post a bond and hire an attorney to save an asset that the government proposes to forfeit without legal proceedings.

 

Although Governor Snyder signed some much needed changes into law late last year in October which calls for greater transparency and higher evidence standards, Michigan still has a long way to go. While the new laws increase the burden of proof required to keep confiscated property from both drug and public nuisance forfeiture cases, and now requires “clear and convincing” evidence, cases like the one the Murrays are facing still happen. This  means that we are still not where we need to be when it comes to civil forfeiture laws in Michigan. Our legislators can fix this injustice.

Back to
Top ▲
Aggressive Criminal Defense