legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Benson v. County of Mendocino CA1/2
California’s drug asset forfeiture laws (Health & Saf. Code, § 11469 et seq.) provide procedures under which property connected with certain unlawful drug activity may be forfeited to the state or local government. (Ramirez v. Tulare County District Attorney’s Office (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 911, 917 (Ramirez).) “[F]orfeiture is disfavored,” however, and “the forfeiture statutes are strictly construed in favor of the person against whom forfeiture is sought, and procedural requirements set forth in the forfeiture statutes must be fully satisfied by the agency pursuing that remedy.” (Ibid.)In this case, plaintiffs Thomas Benson, Michelle Pierce, and Ole Stribling allege their property was seized by law enforcement officers but the resulting forfeiture proceedings were “invalid in the first instance” because they were initiated in violation of the statutory requirements for nonjudicial forfeiture. Plaintiffs petitioned for a writ of mandate seeking the return of their s

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale