In some DWI cases the
arresting agency has the legal authority to seize and forfeit (keep and/or
sell) the motor vehicle involved. Vehicle forfeiture is covered by Minnesota
Statute section 169A.63. For the purposes of this law, “offenses” includes
both DWI offenses and alcohol-related driver’s license revocations arising
from separate incidents. The motor vehicle used in a DWI offense may be seized
and forfeited by the arresting agency under the following circumstances:
a.) The current
offense is the 3rd offense within 10 years and the driver is now charged
with DWI or test refusal. (Second Degree DWI).
b.) The current
offense is the 2nd offense within 10 years and the driver is now charged
with DWI with a child under the age of 16 present, or driving with an
alcohol level of 0.20% or more. (Second Degree DWI).
c.) The current
offense is the fourth offense within 10 years and the driver is now charged
with felony DWI. (First Degree DWI).
d.) The driver is charged with any form of DWI or test refusal while the driver’s
license is under cancellation for being inimical to public safety.
e.) The driver is
charged with any form of DWI or test refusal while the driver’s license is
subject to a restriction prohibiting consumption of any amount of alcohol or
controlled substance (B-Card restriction).
If the arresting agency
concludes the vehicle is subject to seizure and forfeiture under this law,
they can seize it immediately and keep possession of it while any legal
proceedings are pending. The arresting agency must issue a Notice of Seizure
and Intent to Forfeit the vehicle to the driver of the vehicle and to anyone
else who may have an ownership or possessory interest in the vehicle.
A motor vehicle is subject to
forfeiture under this law only if its owner knew or should have known of the
unlawful use or intended use of the vehicle. If the driver is the owner, or
one of joint owners, this is not an issue. But if the vehicle is owned by
someone else who had no knowledge that the driver would use it to violate this
law, the owner has a good legal argument against the forfeiture action. Under
these circumstances the arresting agency sometimes voluntarily returns the
vehicle to the owner. If not, the owner must take the appropriate legal action
to request the return of the vehicle.
WITHIN 30 DAYS FOLLOWING SERVICE
OF A NOTICE OF SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE UNDER THIS STATUTE, A CLAIMANT MAY FILE A
DEMAND FOR A JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF THE FORFEITURE.
Again, this demand for a hearing
to determine the legality of the forfeiture must be made within 30 days to be
effective.
As with vehicle license plate
impoundment, a hearing to determine the legal validity of a vehicle seizure and
forfeiture is very similar to an Implied Consent Hearing. Before the arresting agency can take the final
step in the vehicle forfeiture action, the accused driver/owner must either be
convicted of the alleged criminal offense or have his driver’s license revoked
under the Implied Consent law, or both. Thus, if the accused driver/owner can
successfully defend against the criminal charges and the license revocation, the
vehicle forfeiture can be avoided. Anyone facing a vehicle forfeiture should
review the “Possible Defenses” section of this website and discuss the specifics
of their case with an experienced defense attorney.
There are circumstances where
the arresting agency has the legal authority to seize and forfeit a vehicle, but
decides not to do so. This usually happens when the vehicle has little or no
equity value. The law specifies that if there is a loan against the vehicle, the
forfeiture is subject to the loan. This means that if the arresting agency
forfeits the vehicle and sells it, the proceeds must first be used to
pay off the loan balance, and any money left over can go to the appropriate
government agency. If there is a loan on the vehicle and the balance due on the
loan is high compared to the value of the vehicle, going through the necessary
legal proceedings for forfeiture does not make economic sense for the arresting
agency. The same thing is true when the vehicle just isn’t worth very much. In
such cases, the attorney representing the arresting agency may direct the police
department to impound the plates from the vehicle then return the vehicle to its
owner, or may negotiate the sale of the vehicle back to the registered owner at
a reduced price. An attorney representing the vehicle owner may be able to
arrange the return or repurchase of the vehicle by negotiating with the
prosecuting attorney and presenting him or her with information regarding the
vehicle’s value and any loan balance.
|
