TY - JOUR
T1 - An exploratory analysis of federal litigation in the United States challenging asset forfeiture
AU - Gabbidon, Shaun L.
AU - Higgins, George E.
AU - Martin, Favian
AU - Nelson, Matthew
AU - Brown, Jimmy
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2011/3
Y1 - 2011/3
N2 - This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94% were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff 's winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research.
AB - This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94% were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff 's winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79751486061&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79751486061&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0887403410365895
DO - 10.1177/0887403410365895
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:79751486061
SN - 0887-4034
VL - 22
SP - 50
EP - 64
JO - Criminal Justice Policy Review
JF - Criminal Justice Policy Review
IS - 1
ER -