This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Jensen, E. L. Articles by Gerber, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Civil Forfeiture of Assets and the War on Drugs: Expanding Criminal Sanctions While Reducing Due Process Protections

Jurg Gerber

The War on Drugs has resulted in some of the most extensive changes in criminal justice policy since the due process revolution of the 1960s. Asset forfeiture has been used as a criminal sanction but has been camouflaged as a civil procedure, thus in effect limiting the due process rights of those accused. The state has extended its control over citizens and has simultaneously weakened the rights of individuals to protect themselves against state intrusion. The potential for excess with a civil asset forfeiture policy absent adequate due process protections render this policy unacceptable in a society based on the rule of law.

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 42, No. 3, 421-434 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128796042003005


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. R. Williams Civil Asset Forfeiture: Where does the Money Go? Criminal Justice Review, September 1, 2002; 27(2): 321 - 329. [Abstract] [PDF]