Originally from Asset Forfeiture Law in the United States, Third Edition
§ 10-1 Overview
A great many civil forfeiture cases involve a challenge to the claimant’s standing to contest the forfeiture. Section 8-2 discussed the Government’s use of special interrogatories to obtain evidence relating to the claimant’s standing, and § 9-3 discussed the procedure for challenging the claimant’s standing under Rule G(8)(c). This chapter focuses on the nature of the interest in the defendant property that the claimant must have to establish standing and how the courts have resolved standing challenges in a number of recurring situations, such when the claimant is an unsecured creditor, a lien holder, a crime victim, or the beneficiary of a trust.
The chapter begins, however, by contrasting “standing” with “ownership” and by discussing the confusion that has arisen in the case law as a result of courts’ grafting the definition of “owner” from the innocent owner statute into litigation involving standing. It then discusses the requirement that the claimant establish both Article III standing and prudential standing, and how these terms have been applied in civil forfeiture cases.
Stefan D. Cassella, as a federal prosecutor, was one of the federal government's leading experts on asset forfeiture law for over thirty years, and now serves as an expert witness and consultant to law enforcement agencies and the financial sector as the CEO of AssetForfeitureLaw, LLC.
