Civil forfeitures | Paulding County criminal defense lawyers

In action filed pursuant to this code section shall be filed in the name of the State of Georgia may be brought:

  • in the case of in rem action, by the district attorney for the judicial circuit where the property is located.
  • In the case of an in personam action, by the district attorney for the judicial circuit in which the defendant resides,
  • the district attorney having jurisdiction over any offense which arose out of the same conduct which made the property subject to forfeiture.
  • Such district attorney may bring an action pursuant to this code section in any superior court of this state.
  • If more than one district attorney has jurisdiction to file an action pursuant to this code section, the district attorney having primary jurisdiction over a violation of this article shall, in the event of a conflict, have priority over any other district attorney.
  • Any action brought pursuant to this code section may be compromised or settled in the same manner as other civil actions.
  • An action for forfeiture brought pursuant to this code section shall be tried:
  • if the action is an in rem against real property, in the county where the property is located, except where single tract is divided by County line, in which case the Superior Court of either county shall have jurisdiction.
  • If the action is in rem against tangible or intangible personal property, in any county where the properties located or will be during the pendency of the action, or if the action is in personam as pr isovided by law,
  • testimony that defendant vehicle was in the custody of the Lowndes County Sheriff's Department was sufficient evidence of venue. Turner v. State of Georgia 265 Ga. App. 40 (2004).
  • The following are declared to be contraband and no person shall have a property right in them:
  • all controlled substances, raw materials, or controlled substance analogue that had been manufactured, distributed, dispensed, possessed, or acquired in violation of this article,
  • all property which is directly or indirectly used or intended for use in any manner to facilitate a violation of this article or any proceeds derived to realize therefrom,
  • all property located in this state which would you please show intended for use in any manner to facilitate a violation of this article or of the laws of the United States or any of the several states relating to controlled substances which is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or any proceeds derived or realize therefrom.
  • All weapons possessed used or available for use in any manner to facilitate a violation of this article or any of the laws of United States or any of the several states relating to controlled substances which is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year.
  • Any interest security claim or property or contractual right of any kind affording a source of influence over any enterprise that a person has established, operated, controlled, conducted or participated in the conduct in violation of this article any law of the United States or any of the several states relating to controlled substances which is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or any proceeds derived or realize therefrom;
  • all moneys, negotiable instruments, securities, or other things of value which are found in close proximity to any controlled substance or marijuana or other property which is subject to forfeiture under this subsection.
  • A Mercedes-Benz located in a driveway of apartment containing marijuana growing operation was properly forfeited under close proximity theory. Hodge v. State Georgia 257 Ga. App. 203 (2002).
  • a certificate of deposit in checking account were properly forfeited because the fee document and checkbook were found in close proximity to marijuana. Sale of the State of Georgia 232 Ga. App. 886 (1998).
  • The truck when it was driving was properly forfeited under a facilitation in close proximity theory when methamphetamine was found in claimant's pocket. Moore v. State Georgia 209 Ga. App. 89 (1995).
  • – Found with marijuana in claimant's pocket cash
  • a forfeiture proceeding determination of a claim to real property which was directly or indirectly used or intended for use is a question of fact for trial court. In this case, the court only forfeited curtilage of 4 acre tract to state. State Georgia v. Wilbanks 208 Ga. App. 422 (1993).
  • A property interest shall not be subject to forfeiture under this code section if the owner of such interest or interest holder establishes that the owner or interest holder:
  • it is not legally accountable for the conduct giving rise to the forfeiture, did not consent to it, and did not know and could not reasonably have known of the conduct or that it was likely to occur.
  • Had not acquired and did not stand to acquire substantial proceeds from the conduct giving rise to its forfeiture other than as an interest holder in an arms length commercial transaction.
  • With respect to conveyances for transportation only, did not hold the property jointly, in common, or in community with the person whose conduct gave rise to its forfeiture.
  • Does not hold the property for the benefit of or as nominee for any person whose conduct gave rise to the forfeiture, and, if the owner or interest holder acquired the interest through any such person, the owner or interest holder acquired as a bona fide purchaser for value without knowingly taking part in an illegal transaction.
  • Before the filing of a lien on it and before the effective date of the notice of pending forfeiture relating to it and without notice of its seizure for forfeiture under this article,
  • at the time the interest was acquired, was reasonably without cause to believe that the property was subject to forfeiture or likely to become subject to forfeiture under this article
  • of her vehicle was able to prove that she was an innocent owner. Brother lied to her about his drug activities to get claimant to drive him to make a drug sale. State Georgia v. Ledford 217 Ga. App. 372 (1995).
Categories:

Request Your Free Case Evaluation

With many years of experience in the field, you can rest assured that when you contact an associate from the firm you will be represented by a legal professional who has successfully handled a number of cases, some of which could be quite similar to yours.

    • Please enter your name.
    • This isn't a valid phone number.
      Please enter your phone number.
    • This isn't a valid email address.
      Please enter your email address.
    • Please make a selection.
    • Please enter a message.