A state law allowing police acting on their own to seize property from suspects -- often without getting warrants -- is unfair and should be overhauled, defense attorneys told legislators Thursday.
"This creates a potential for abuse," said lawyer Howard Bass. "There's no checks and balances."
His testimony came before legislative committees on public safety investigating the state's seizure and forfeiture law after allegations that the Metro Gang Strike Force improperly used it to seize money, cars and property.
Although Rep. Debra Hilstrom, DFL-Brooklyn Center, said legislators weren't ready to hear recommendations for changes, they got some.
Bass said the government should have to prove the property was related to a crime and deserved to be seized. Currently, property can be forfeited in an administrative procedure unless the owner demands a court hearing within 60 days of its seizure.
And the court process is complicated. Property owners need to serve proper notice on the police agency and follow court rules of civil procedure and discovery.
Sometimes people who have not been charged with a crime don't challenge seizures because it would cost more in attorney fees than the property is worth, said Tom Plunkett, an attorney with the Minnesota Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
Also, people challenging seizures in civil court waive protections against self-incrimination, exposing themselves to charges.