SmarterthanYou
rebel
https://landline.media/texas-jury-rejects-truckers-claim-to-seized-money/
The case for seizing Woods’ money
Woods was traveling from his home in Natchez, Miss., when he was pulled over on I-10.
The seized money was not counted at the traffic stop. Sheriff’s office employees later counted $41,680. A sheriff’s office dog was reported having later detected the odor of drugs on the money.
The money was seized in May 2019. An investigation was begun June 2021, according to the lawsuit complaint. It took Harris County 27 months to serve Woods and Davis with notice of the state’s petition to forfeit their property.
During the five-day trial, Harris County attorneys grilled Woods about the sources of his income, which included family members, gambling, racing horses, working, selling food, conducting parties, and other sources. He also was grilled on the location of his residence, either an apartment or a rural trailer.
He also was asked why he didn’t shop for a truck or trailer closer to home.
It was suggested that he was going to Houston to buy illegal drugs or that he was laundering drug money.
Officers said Woods acted nervous during the traffic stop, including nervous laughing, pulling on his shirt, trying to lead conversation, and voluntarily explaining he had a CDL.
While individual gestures did not necessarily suggest Woods was lying and was involved in illegal business, taken together they added up, the lead officer at the traffic stop said during the trial.
“My training, my experience, tells me this is drug money,” he said.
Constitutional questions
The level of evidence for seizing money and taking it through civil asset forfeiture is much lower than to charge someone with a crime.
The complaint brought on behalf of Woods and Davis made three general allegations:
Texas has no procedure for obtaining a prompt, post-seizure hearing before civil-forfeiture proceedings. The process takes weeks, months or years. This makes it difficult for property owners to challenge an officer’s probable-cause determination.
A person who asserts their innocence in civil-forfeiture proceedings is required to prove their own innocence.
Law enforcement agencies and prosecutors keep the proceeds from civil-forfeiture cases, which is a strong incentive to seize cash.
The case for seizing Woods’ money
Woods was traveling from his home in Natchez, Miss., when he was pulled over on I-10.
The seized money was not counted at the traffic stop. Sheriff’s office employees later counted $41,680. A sheriff’s office dog was reported having later detected the odor of drugs on the money.
The money was seized in May 2019. An investigation was begun June 2021, according to the lawsuit complaint. It took Harris County 27 months to serve Woods and Davis with notice of the state’s petition to forfeit their property.
During the five-day trial, Harris County attorneys grilled Woods about the sources of his income, which included family members, gambling, racing horses, working, selling food, conducting parties, and other sources. He also was grilled on the location of his residence, either an apartment or a rural trailer.
He also was asked why he didn’t shop for a truck or trailer closer to home.
It was suggested that he was going to Houston to buy illegal drugs or that he was laundering drug money.
Officers said Woods acted nervous during the traffic stop, including nervous laughing, pulling on his shirt, trying to lead conversation, and voluntarily explaining he had a CDL.
While individual gestures did not necessarily suggest Woods was lying and was involved in illegal business, taken together they added up, the lead officer at the traffic stop said during the trial.
“My training, my experience, tells me this is drug money,” he said.
Constitutional questions
The level of evidence for seizing money and taking it through civil asset forfeiture is much lower than to charge someone with a crime.
The complaint brought on behalf of Woods and Davis made three general allegations:
Texas has no procedure for obtaining a prompt, post-seizure hearing before civil-forfeiture proceedings. The process takes weeks, months or years. This makes it difficult for property owners to challenge an officer’s probable-cause determination.
A person who asserts their innocence in civil-forfeiture proceedings is required to prove their own innocence.
Law enforcement agencies and prosecutors keep the proceeds from civil-forfeiture cases, which is a strong incentive to seize cash.
