Drug Seizure Laws Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Drug Seizure Laws - Assignment Example However in the pursuit of such forfeiture, care must be taken to ensure that those who are innocent do not unfairly suffer the same consequences. Introduction The application of the laws that ensure that the profits or benefits obtained from criminal enterprise are forfeited by the state brings about with it a myriad of challenges and obstacles. The most difficult one is working out exactly what parts of this benefit can be directly linked to the drug-associated criminal activity and which parts are not. Care must be taken to ensure that those who may have inadvertently and innocently found themselves assisting in the commission of such crime are absolved of their involvement and that they do not suffer unduly due to the activities others, especially when it can be proven that they had no knowledge of it and did actively participate. The process of such determination is purely in the hands of the investigators and it is their responsibility to ensure that those who are innocent do no t suffer while at the same time ensuring that as much as possible of the proceeds of such crime is recoverable and recovered. 1. If a house was rented but was found to be used for illegal drug-related activities, it can still be seized by the authorities since it was being used in the commission of a drug-related crime under the civil forfeiture regulations. Under these regulations the police have the right to seize any such properties (Silveira, 2010). The detail of exactly how this happens varies from State to State. In Minnesota for example the police are supposed to notify the landlord if drugs valued at more than $100 are found in a rented property. The landlord is then expected to get the tenant to vacate the property. If that doesn’t happen and a second seizure of drugs takes place then the property is liable to judicial forfeiture. Similarly if a stash of drugs valued at over $1,000 is found at a rented property it may also be seized (Pirius, 2010). In a case reported in Orange County, Southern California, a Tony Jalali’s property was seized after it was found to be used for illegal drug-related activities (Bullock & Salzman, 2013). 2. If the car belongs to a relative, the car is still liable for civil forfeiture. A car that is used for the committing of a drug-related offence and especially one that is used as a possible means of escape from lawful arrest is liable for forfeiture regardless of whether the person that was using it at the time was the legal owner or not. According to the Minnesota Forfeiture laws, as long as the retail value of the drugs is $75, the vehicle is still forfeitable. In Court, the legal owner would have to prove that they have a defense against the forfeiture or that seizure of the vehicle would cause undue hardship to the members of the owner’s family for the vehicle to be released back to them (Pirius, 2010).In many cases, proceeds from the sale of vehicles collected under the drug-related seizure laws are usually ploughed into the operations of law enforcement so it is their interest to seize as many of these as possible as it goes directly to their budget, creating an incentive for the policemen to seize such vehicles.

The Annexation of Hawaii Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

The Annexation of Hawaii - Essay Example The process itself was rocky indeed, being ultimately accomplished only after years of international negotiation, domestic debate, and political maneuvering. The importance of the event was significant enough in its day, but it would prove even more important half a century later. The annexation of the territory that would eventually become the fiftieth state was far from easy. The events preceding the annexation of Hawaii were a mixture of economic and political dynamics that had been brewing for several decades. Those circumstances would ultimately be brought to a clear conclusion by the outbreak of the Spanish-American War. The economic background immediately preceding the debate over annexing Hawaii centered around one concept; free trade. Initially, "[t]he American approach to Hawaii, like that to China or to the Pacific coast of North America, was a matter of private enterprise, without government intervention" (Best & Johnson 79). As more American and foreign investment poured into Hawaii, however, it became clear that there would have to be some form of public policy steps taken to address the growing concerns regarding commerce, immigration, and the political ramifications in the Kingdom of Hawaii. One problem was that the American sugar industry had the protection of tariffs, and the Hawaiian economy was becoming more and more dependent on the American markets. This resulted in a natural confluence of interests pointing toward annexation, particularly after Hawaii was given a favored trade status. That said, however, "[t]here was no unified 'voice of business' calling for annexation, not even in Hawaii...and in the United States beet and cane sugar producers, some refiners, and others argued against incorporation of Hawaii into the union. It can probably be safely said that the great majority of American businessmen were quite indifferent to the admission of Hawaii..." (Best & Johnson 142). Politically, there was the ever-present debate between those who did not want to entangle the United States in matters beyond its immediate borders and those with a more expansionist view. This debate was one of the key reasons that annexation took so long to accomplish; having seen the first treaty efforts as early as 1854 and not ultimately accomplishing the goal until some forty-four years later. Charges of American imperialism were raised, against which the expansionists countered with the protection of strategic national interests. The debate was rhetorical and theoretical until one foreign policy event made everything important: The Spanish-American War. As Fletcher notes: Among these unresolved forces and policies, the Spanish-American War served as a kind of catalyst... Although the war was only indirectly brought about by Pacific or Far Eastern factors, it profoundly influenced developments in that part of the world through the largely unplanned American annexation of the Philippines... The war also led at once to the annexation of Hawaii..." (Pletcher 258) Considering the natural convergence of economic and political issues that had been building from early in the 19th Century, when the war broke out and America realized its vital interests in Asia were