Categories
Articles

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo

Detox Shampoos Overview

Hair detoxification is a crucial step for those undergoing hair drug tests, which can detect drug use over a longer period than other testing methods. High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo is designed to help users cleanse their hair of toxins, including drug residues. Here’s an overview of how it works and its effectiveness.

What Are Detox Shampoos?

Detox shampoos are products formulated to remove drug traces and other contaminants from the hair. These shampoos, like High Voltage Folli-Cleanse and Old Style Aloe Toxin Rid, are especially useful for people who need to pass a hair drug test. Hair tests can detect drugs in the system for up to 90 days, so regular drug users may find it difficult to pass without proper detoxification.

How High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo Works

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo uses a combination of natural and artificial ingredients to cleanse the hair shaft. The product works by penetrating the hair, targeting drug residues, dirt, and other toxins that might be trapped inside. The shampoo is easy to use:

  1. Wet your hair with warm water.
  2. Apply the shampoo and massage it into the scalp.
  3. Leave it in for a few minutes.
  4. Rinse thoroughly to ensure the toxins are washed out.

Effectiveness of High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo

The effectiveness of High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo varies depending on the user’s drug consumption and application frequency. It is more likely to work for users with mild to moderate drug exposure. However, for heavy drug users, multiple applications or other detox methods may be required. Some users combine it with the Macujo Method for better results, but even then, passing a test isn’t guaranteed.

Limitations and Considerations

Although High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo can help users detox their hair, it doesn’t offer a 100% success rate. Factors such as the type of drug, frequency of use, and timing of the test can influence results. Users should closely follow the instructions and consider combining the shampoo with other detox products for improved outcomes.

Hair Drug Test Procedure

Hair drug testing is a common method used by employers and agencies to detect drug use over an extended period. The process starts with the collection of a small hair sample, usually around 1.5 inches in length, taken from the scalp. This length can reveal drug usage for up to 90 days, depending on the type of drug and frequency of use.

Once the hair sample is collected, it is washed to remove any external contaminants such as dirt or oils. Following this, the hair undergoes a chemical process where drug metabolites, trapped in the hair shaft, are extracted. These metabolites are byproducts of drugs like marijuana, opioids, and cocaine. The extracted sample is then analyzed using advanced techniques like chromatography-mass spectrometry to accurately detect and measure any drugs present.

Importance of Detox Shampoos

Detox shampoos are used to help people pass hair drug tests by eliminating traces of drugs from the hair. They work by penetrating deep into the hair shaft to dissolve and remove drug metabolites and other contaminants. Products like Old Style Aloe Toxin Rid are particularly popular due to their effectiveness in detoxifying the hair.

The shampoo contains a mix of natural and artificial ingredients, such as aloe vera and propylene glycol, which aid in deep cleansing while keeping the hair hydrated. Another commonly used product is High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo, which is known for helping moderate users clear hair tests.

Effectiveness of Detox Shampoos

Detox shampoos can be effective, but their success often depends on how frequently a person uses drugs and how well the shampoo is used. For frequent or heavy drug users, methods like the Macujo Method, which involves combining Old Style Aloe Toxin Rid with other products such as vinegar and detergent, can increase the chances of passing a hair drug test.

In conclusion, while hair drug tests are difficult to beat due to their long detection window, detox shampoos, when used properly, can help eliminate drug residues and improve your chances of passing the test.

Old Style Aloe Toxin Rid Review

Understanding Hair Drug Tests

Hair drug tests are popular because they can detect drug use over a longer period compared to urine tests. A small sample of hair, usually about 1.5 inches long, is taken from the scalp and processed to find drug residues. This test can reveal drug use for several months, which is why detoxifying your hair before a drug test is crucial, especially if you have used drugs frequently.

What is High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo?

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo is designed to help remove drug residues and other contaminants from your hair. It works by deeply cleaning the hair shaft to eliminate toxins. This shampoo is effective because it combines both natural and synthetic ingredients to cleanse your hair thoroughly. It is especially useful for people who need to pass a hair drug test.

How Does It Work?

The shampoo contains ingredients that penetrate the hair shaft, breaking down and removing impurities and drug residues. For best results, it’s recommended to use the shampoo multiple times, particularly if you have a history of regular drug use. Regular use helps ensure that any traces of drugs are removed from your hair.

Usage Instructions

For Mild Cases: If you don’t have a long history of drug use, simply using High Voltage Folli-Cleanse like a regular shampoo may be enough. Apply the shampoo to wet hair, massage it into your scalp, and rinse thoroughly. Repeat this process a few times before your test, as the shampoo helps cleanse any contaminants or drug traces.

For Extensive Detox: For those who have used drugs heavily, more intensive methods are necessary. One popular method is the Macujo Method, which combines High Voltage Folli-Cleanse with other products for better results. Here’s how it works:

  1. Prepare Your Hair: Wet your hair with lukewarm water.
  2. Apply Vinegar: Use Heinz’s Vinegar and apply it to your hair. This helps open the hair cuticles and removes some impurities.
  3. Use Clean and Clear Shampoo: Apply Clean and Clear Shampoo to your hair and gently massage it in. This helps to further cleanse the scalp.
  4. Wrap and Wait: Cover your hair with a plastic cap and leave the products in for about 45 minutes.
  5. Rinse and Repeat: Rinse your hair thoroughly, then apply High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo. Leave it on for 5-7 minutes, then rinse. Follow this with a final rinse using a strong detergent.

Final Thoughts: While High Voltage Folli-Cleanse is effective, combining it with the Macujo Method can improve your chances of passing a hair drug test. This method involves several steps and products to ensure a thorough cleanse. Always follow the instructions carefully and consider using additional detox products if needed for the best results.

Reviews and Results

Effectiveness and User Reviews

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo is popular among those looking to pass hair drug tests. Many users have reported success with this product, particularly when it is used in conjunction with other detoxifying shampoos, such as Zydot Ultra Clean Shampoo. This combination is believed to significantly improve the likelihood of passing a hair drug test. However, it’s important to note that results can vary depending on the frequency of drug use.

Why Hair Detox is Important

Hair drug tests are different from urine tests because they have a longer detection window. This means that drug use can be detected for a more extended period in hair compared to urine. For individuals with moderate to heavy drug use, passing a hair drug test can be challenging. Detox shampoos like High Voltage Folli-Cleanse are designed to address this challenge by cleaning drug residues and contaminants from the hair shaft.

How High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Works

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse works by penetrating the hair shaft to remove toxins. The shampoo is formulated to break down drug residues and other impurities trapped in the hair. For best results, it is recommended to follow the instructions carefully, including using the shampoo multiple times and allowing it to remain in the hair for the specified amount of time.

Combining Products for Best Results

To maximize the effectiveness of High Voltage Folli-Cleanse, many users combine it with other detox products. Zydot Ultra Clean Shampoo is often used alongside Folli-Cleanse to enhance its detoxifying effects. This combination helps ensure that all traces of drugs are removed, increasing the chances of passing the test.

Alternative Products

Introduction to Detox Shampoos

Detox shampoos are specially designed to remove drug traces and contaminants from your hair, which is crucial for passing hair drug tests. Unlike urine tests, hair tests have a longer detection period, meaning drugs can be detected for months after use. This is why proper detoxification is essential for those preparing for a drug test. High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo is one such product that helps in this process.

How High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Works

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo uses a combination of natural and synthetic ingredients to clean your hair thoroughly. It works by breaking down and removing drug residues and impurities trapped in the hair shaft. For the best results, it’s important to follow the instructions closely, including using the shampoo multiple times and allowing it to sit in your hair for the recommended duration.

Comparing Alternatives

While High Voltage Folli-Cleanse is effective, there are other detox shampoos available. For example, Old Style Aloe Toxin Rid Shampoo is known for its strong performance, especially for those with higher levels of drug exposure. It’s generally considered more effective than High Voltage Folli-Cleanse for heavy users, but it is also more expensive.

High Voltage Detox Shampoo is often seen as a more affordable option but is recommended for those with only mild to moderate drug exposure. It may not be as effective for those with significant drug use compared to Old Style Aloe Toxin Rid.

FAQs

Can the Shampoo Damage My Hair?

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo is formulated to remove drug traces and contaminants from your hair, but some users are concerned about potential damage. The shampoo contains strong cleansing agents that can strip your hair of its natural oils, which might lead to dryness or irritation, especially if used excessively. To minimize these risks, it’s crucial to follow the usage instructions carefully and avoid frequent use. If you notice dryness or irritation, consider using a moisturizing conditioner to help maintain your hair’s health.

How Does It Work with Zydot Ultra Clean?

Many people wonder if High Voltage Folli-Cleanse can be used effectively with other products, such as Zydot Ultra Clean. Using these products together can be beneficial. Zydot Ultra Clean is designed to remove oils and residual build-up from your hair, which complements the detoxifying effects of High Voltage Folli-Cleanse. When used in combination, these products can enhance each other’s effectiveness, improving your chances of passing a hair drug test. Ensure you follow the recommended steps for both products to achieve the best results.

Is It Safe for Daily Use?

High Voltage Folli-Cleanse Detox Shampoo is not intended for daily use. Its strong detoxifying ingredients are designed to address drug traces and contaminants, which means it can be harsh if used too often. Regular, daily use can lead to dryness and damage to your hair and scalp. Instead, reserve this shampoo for when you need to prepare for a drug test and use a gentle, regular shampoo for everyday washing. This approach will help maintain the health and moisture of your hair.

Categories
Articles

A Guide to Drug-Related State Ballot Initiatives

 

PROPOSITION 200

OFFICIAL TITLE

AN INITIATIVE MEASURE

AMENDING TITLE 13, TITLE 41, AND TITLE 42, OF THE ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 11, BY ADDING �41-1604.16; RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ARIZONA PARENTS COMMISSION ON DRUG EDUCATION AND PREVENTION; AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 11, BY ADDING �41-1604.14; RELATING TO PERSONS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE; AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 13, BY AMENDING �13-3412 AND ADDING �13-3412.01; RELATING TO PERMISSIBLE USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES BY SERIOUSLY ILL OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENTS; AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 11, BY ADDING �41-1604.15 AND AMENDING TITLE 31, CHAPTER 3, BY ADDING �31-411.01; RELATING TO PAROLE FOR PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES; AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 9, BY ADDING �13-901.01; RELATING TO PROBATION FOR PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND BY ADDING �13-901.02; RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND; AND AMENDING TITLE 42, CHAPTER 12, BY ADDING �42-1204.01; RELATING TO LUXURY PRIVILEGE TAXES; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY.

TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT

Be it enacted by the people of the State of Arizona: The following amendments are proposed to become valid when approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon and upon proclamation pursuant thereto by the Governor of the State of Arizona.

Section 1. TITLE

THIS ACT SHALL BE KNOWN AND MAY BE CITED AS THE “DRUG MEDICALIZATION, PREVENTION, AND CONTROL ACT OF 1996.”

Section 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA FIND AND DECLARE THE FOLLOWING:

  1. ARIZONA’S CURRENT APPROACH TO DRUG CONTROL NEEDS TO BE STRENGTHENED. THIS IS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT, ACCORDING TO THE ARIZONA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION, BETWEEN 1991 AND 1993 MARIJUANA USE DOUBLED AMONG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS AND, BETWEEN 1990 AND 1993 QUADRUPLED AMONG MIDDLE-SCHOOL STUDENTS. IN ADDITION TO ACTIVELY ENFORCING OUR CRIMINAL LAWS AGAINST DRUGS, WE NEED TO MEDICALIZE ARIZONA’S DRUG CONTROL POLICY: RECOGNIZING THAT DRUG ABUSE IS A PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEM AND TREATING ABUSE AS A DISEASE. THUS, DRUG TREATMENT AND PREVENTION MUST BE EXPANDED.
  2. WE MUST ALSO TOUGHEN ARIZONA’S LAWS AGAINST VIOLENT CRIMINALS ON DRUGS. ANY PERSON WHO COMMITS A VIOLENT CRIME WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS SHOULD SERVE 100% OF HIS OR HER SENTENCE WITH ABSOLUTELY NO EARLY RELEASE.
  3. THOUSANDS OF ARIZONANS SUFFER FROM DEBILITATING DISEASES SUCH AS GLAUCOMA, MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS, CANCER, AND AIDS, BUT CANNOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE NECESSARY DRUGS THEY NEED. ALLOWING DOCTORS TO PRESCRIBE SCHEDULE I CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES COULD SAVE VICTIMS OF THESE DISEASES FROM LOSS OF SIGHT, LOSS OF PHYSICAL CAPACITY, AND GREATLY REDUCE THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF THE SERIOUSLY ILL AND TERMINALLY ILL.
  4. THE DRUG PROBLEMS OF NON-VIOLENT PERSONS WHO ARE CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS ARE BEST HANDLED THROUGH COURT-SUPERVISED DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS. THESE PROGRAMS ARE MORE EFFECTIVE THAN LOCKING NON-VIOLENT OFFENDERS UP IN A COSTLY PRISON. PILOT PROGRAMS IN ARIZONA THAT PROVIDE TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES TO PRISON FOR LOW LEVEL DRUG OFFENDERS HAVE A 73% SUCCESS RATE AND COST ROUGHLY 1/8 AS MUCH AS PRISON. OVER THE NEXT DECADE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS CAN BE SAVED BY USING MANDATORY DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO PRISON.
  5. VIOLENT OFFENDERS ARE NOT ADEQUATELY PUNISHED DUE TO THE PRISON OVER-CROWDING CRISIS IN ARIZONA. PLACING NON-VIOLENT PERSONS WHO ARE CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS IN COURT-SUPERVISED DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS WILL FREE UP SPACE IN OUR PRISONS SO THAT THERE IS ROOM TO INCARCERATE VIOLENT OFFENDERS AND DRUG DEALERS.
  6. THE MISSING LINK IN DRUG EDUCATION AND PREVENTION IS PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT. THE TAX DOLLARS SAVED BY ELIMINATING PRISON TIME FOR NON-VIOLENT PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS SHOULD BE USED FOR DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION, TARGETED AT PROGRAMS THAT INCREASE PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN THEIR CHILDREN’S DRUG-EDUCATION.

Section 3. PURPOSE AND INTENT

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA DECLARE THEIR PURPOSES TO BE AS FOLLOWS:

  1. TO REQUIRE THAT ANY PERSON WHO COMMITS A VIOLENT CRIME UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF DRUGS SERVE 100 PERCENT OF HIS OR HER SENTENCE AND NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE OR ANY FORM OF EARLY RELEASE.
  2. TO PERMIT DOCTORS TO PRESCRIBE SCHEDULE I CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES TO TREAT A DISEASE, OR TO RELIEVE THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF SERIOUSLY ILL AND TERMINALLY ILL PATIENTS.
  3. TO REQUIRE THAT NON-VIOLENT PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF DRUGS SUCCESSFULLY UNDERGO COURT-SUPERVISED MANDATORY DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAMS AND PROBATION.
  4. TO REQUIRE THAT NON-VIOLENT PERSONS CURRENTLY IN PRISON FOR PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS, AND NOT SERVING A CONCURRENT SENTENCE FOR ANOTHER CRIME, OR PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED OR SENTENCED OR SUBJECT TO SENTENCING UNDER ANY HABITUAL CRIMINAL STATUTE IN ANY JURISDICTION IN THE UNITED STATES, BE MADE ELIGIBLE FOR IMMEDIATE PAROLE AND DRUG TREATMENT, EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICE.
  5. TO FREE UP SPACE IN OUR PRISONS TO PROVIDE ROOM FOR VIOLENT OFFENDERS.
  6. TO EXPAND THE SUCCESS OF PILOT DRUG INTERVENTION PROGRAMS WHICH DIVERT DRUG OFFENDERS FROM PRISON TO DRUG TREATMENT, EDUCATION, AND COUNSELING.

Section 4.

Title 41, Chapter 11, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �41-1604.16 to read as follows:

�41-1604.16. ARIZONA PARENTS COMMISSION ON DRUG EDUCATION AND PREVENTION.

  1. THE ARIZONA PARENTS COMMISSION ON DRUG EDUCATION AND PREVENTION IS HEREBY CREATED. THE COMMISSION SHALL CONSIST OF NINE (9) MEMBERS. THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR WITHIN SIXTY (60) DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT AND SHALL SERVE A TWO YEAR TERM. OF THE NINE MEMBERS, FIVE SHALL BE PARENTS WITH CHILDREN CURRENTLY ENROLLED IN AN ARIZONA SCHOOL, ONE SHALL BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, ONE SHALL BE AN EDUCATOR IN A LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ONE SHALL BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF A COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT, AND ONE SHALL BE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DRUG EDUCATION AND TREATMENT COMMUNITY.
  2. EACH MEMBER SHALL BE APPOINTED FOR A TERM OF TWO YEARS. THE MEMBERS SHALL RECEIVE NO PAY, BUT MAY BE REIMBURSED FOR ACTUAL EXPENSES INCURRED ON COMMISSION BUSINESS.
  3. THE COMMISSION SHALL FUND PROGRAMS THAT WILL INCREASE AND ENHANCE PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT AND WILL INCREASE EDUCATION ABOUT THE SERIOUS RISKS AND PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEMS CAUSED BY THE ABUSE OF ALCOHOL AND CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.
  4. THE COMMISSION SHALL CONTRACT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH A NOT FOR PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR GOVERNMENT ENTITY WITH EXPERTISE IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE EDUCATION AND PREVENTION.

Section 5.

Title 41, Chapter 11, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �41-1604.14 to read as follows:

�4l-1604.14. PAROLE NONELIGIBILITY; VIOLENT CRIME; INFLUENCE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE; DEFINITION

  1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, ANY PERSON CONVICTED OF A VIOLENT CRIME COMMITTED WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS TITLE 13, CHAPTER 34, IS NONELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE AND MUST SERVE 100 PERCENT OF HIS OR HER SENTENCE IN PRISON. PURSUANT TO �41-1604.09, THE DIRECTOR SHALL INCLUDE ANY SUCH PERSON IN THE CLASSES OF NON-ELIGIBILITY REQUIRED TO BE ESTABLISHED BY THE DIRECTOR.
  2. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION, A VIOLENT CRIME INCLUDES ANY CRIMINAL ACT WHICH RESULTS IN DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURY OR ANY CRIMINAL USE OF WEAPONS OR DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTS.

Section 6.

Title 13, Chapter 13, �13-3412, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended as follows:

�13-3412. Exceptions and exemptions; burden of proof; privileged communications.

  1. The provisions of ��13-3402, 13-3403, 13-3404, 13-3404.01 and 13-3405 through 13-3409 do not apply to:
    1. Manufacturers, wholesalers, pharmacies and pharmacists under the provisions of �32-1921 and 32-1961.
    2. Medical practitioners, pharmacies and pharmacists while acting in the course of their professional practice, in good faith and in accordance with generally accepted medical standards.
    3. Persons who lawfully acquire and use such drugs only for scientific purposes.
    4. Officers and employees of the United States, this state or a political subdivision of the United States or this state, while acting in the course of their official duties.
    5. An employee or agent of a person described in paragraphs 1 through 4 of this subsection, and a registered nurse or medical technician under the supervision of a medical practitioner, while such employee, agent, nurse or technician is acting in the course of professional practice or employment, and not on his own account.
    6. A common or contract carrier or warehouseman, or an employee of such carrier or warehouseman, whose possession of such drugs is in the usual course of business or employment.
    7. Persons lawfully in possession or control of controlled substances authorized by title 36, chapter 27.
    8. Persons who sell any non-narcotic substance that under the federal food, drug and cosmetic act may lawfully be sold over the counter without a prescription.
    9. THE RECEIPT, POSSESSION OR USE, OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INCLUDED IN SCHEDULE I OF �36-2512, BY ANY SERIOUSLY ILL OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT, PURSUANT TO THE PRESCRIPTION OF A DOCTOR IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF �13-3412.01.
  2. In any complaint, information or indictment and in any action or proceeding brought for the enforcement of any provision of this chapter the burden of proof of any such exception, excuse, defense or exemption is on the defendant.
  3. In addition to other exceptions to the physician-patient privilege, information communicated to a physician in an effort to procure unlawfully a prescription-only, dangerous or narcotic drug, or to procure unlawfully the administration of such drug, is not a privileged communication.

Section7.

Title 13, Chapter 13, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �13-3412.01 to read as follows:

�13-3412.01. PRESCRIBING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES INCLUDED IN SCHEDULE I OF �36-2512 FOR SERIOUSLY ILL AND TERMINALLY ILL PATIENTS

  1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, ANY MEDICAL DOCTOR LICENSED TO PRACTICE IN ARIZONA MAY PRESCRIBE A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INCLUDED IN SCHEDULE I OF �36-2512 TO TREAT A DISEASE, OR TO RELIEVE THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF A SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENT OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT, SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF �13-3412.01. IN PRESCRIBING SUCH A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, THE MEDICAL DOCTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL STANDARDS.
  2. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, A MEDICAL DOCTOR MUST DOCUMENT THAT SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH EXISTS WHICH SUPPORTS THE USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE LISTED IN SCHEDULE I OF �36-2512 TO TREAT A DISEASE, OR TO RELIEVE THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF A SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENT OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT BEFORE PRESCRIBING THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE. A MEDICAL DOCTOR PRESCRIBING A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INCLUDED IN SCHEDULE I OF �36-2512 TO TREAT A DISEASE, OR TO RELIEVE THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF A SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENT OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT, MUST OBTAIN THE WRITTEN OPINION OF A SECOND MEDICAL DOCTOR THAT THE PRESCRIBING OF THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE IS APPROPRIATE TO TREAT A DISEASE OR TO RELIEVE THE PAIN AND SUFFERING OF A SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENT OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT. THE WRITTEN OPINION OF THE SECOND MEDICAL DOCTOR SHALL BE KEPT IN THE PATIENT’S OFFICIAL MEDICAL FILE. BEFORE PRESCRIBING THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INCLUDED IN SCHEDULE I OF �36-2512 THE MEDICAL DOCTOR SHALL RECEIVE IN WRITING THE CONSENT OF THE PATIENT.
  3. ANY FAILURE TO COMPLY WT. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION MAY BE THE SUBJECT OF INVESTIGATION AND APPROPRIATE DISCIPLINING ACTION BY THE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS.

Section 8.

Title 41, Chapter 11, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �4l-1604.15 to read as follows:

�41-1604.15. PAROLE ELIGIBILITY FOR PERSONS PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE

  1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, IF A PRISONER HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF THE PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AS DEFINED IN �36-2501, AND IS NOT CONCURRENTLY SERVING ANOTHER SENTENCE, THE PRISONER SHALL BE ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE.
  2. ANY PERSON WHO HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN CONVICTED OF A VIOLENT CRIME AS DEFINED IN �41-1604.14, SUBSECTION B OR HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN CONVICTED, SENTENCED OR SUBJECT TO SENTENCING UNDER ANY HABITUAL CRIMINAL STATUTE IN ANY JURISDICTION IN THE UNITED STATES, SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION.
  3. PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE PURSUANT TO THIS ACT SHALL NOT INCLUDE POSSESSION FOR SALE, PRODUCTION, MANUFACTURING, OR TRANSPORTATION FOR SALE OF ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.
  4. WITHIN NINETY (90) DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT, THE DIRECTOR OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS SHALL PREPARE A LIST WHICH IDENTIFIES EACH PERSON WHO IS ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, AND DELIVER THE LIST TO THE BOARD OF EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY.

Section 9.

Title 31, Chapter 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �31-411.01 to read as follows:

�31-411.01. PAROLE FOR PERSONS PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE; TREATMENT; PREVENTION; EDUCATION; TERMINATION OF PAROLE

  1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, EVERY PRISONER WHO IS ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF �41-1604.15 SHALL BE RELEASED UPON PAROLE, PROVIDED, HOWEVER THAT IF THE BOARD OF EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY DETERMINES THAT A PRISONER SO ELIGIBLE WOULD BE A DANGER TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, THAT PRISONER SHALL NOT BE RELEASED UPON PAROLE.
  2. AS TO EACH PRISONER RELEASED UPON PAROLE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, THE BOARD SHALL ORDER THAT AS A CONDITION OF PAROLE THE PERSON BE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN AN APPROPRIATE DRUG TREATMENT OR EDUCATION PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY A QUALIFIED AGENCY OR ORGANIZATION THAT PROVIDES SUCH TREATMENTS TO PERSONS WHO ABUSE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. EACH PERSON ENROLLED IN A DRUG TREATMENT OR EDUCATION PROGRAM SHALL BE REQUIRED TO PAY FOR HIS OR HER PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM TO THE EXTENT OF HIS OR HER FINANCIAL ABILITY.
  3. EACH PERSON RELEASED UPON PAROLE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL REMAIN ON PAROLE UNLESS THE BOARD REVOKES PAROLE OR GRANTS AN ABSOLUTE DISCHARGE FROM PAROLE OR UNTIL THE PRISONER REACHES HIS OR HER INDIVIDUAL EARNED RELEASE CREDIT DATE PURSUANT TO �41-1604.10. WHEN THE PRISONER REACHES HIS OR HER INDIVIDUAL EARNED RELEASE CREDIT DATE, HIS OR HER PAROLE SHALL BE TERMINATED AND HE OR SHE SHALL NO LONGER BE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD.

Section 10.

Title 13, Chapter 9, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �13-901.01 to read as follows:

�13-901.01. PROBATION FOR PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION AND USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES; TREATMENT; PREVENTION; EDUCATION

  1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, ANY PERSON WHO IS CONVICTED OF THE PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AS DEFINED IN �36-2501 SHALL BE ELIGIBLE FOR PROBATION. THE COURT SHALL SUSPEND THE IMPOSITION OR EXECUTION OF SENTENCE AND PLACE SUCH PERSON ON PROBATION.
  2. ANY PERSON WHO HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF OR INDICTED FOR A VIOLENT CRIME AS DEFINED �41-1604.14, SUBSECTION B SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PROBATION AS PROVIDED FOR IN THIS SECTION, BUT INSTEAD SHALL BE SENTENCED PURSUANT TO THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF TITLE 13, CHAPTER 34.
  3. PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE PURSUANT TO THIS ACT SHALL NOT INCLUDE POSSESSION FOR SALE, PRODUCTION, MANUFACTURING, OR TRANSPORTATION FOR SALE OF ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.
  4. IF A PERSON IS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AS DEFINED IN �36-2501, AS A CONDITION OF PROBATION, THE COURT SHALL REQUIRE PARTICIPATION IN AN APPROPRIATE DRUG TREATMENT OR EDUCATION PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY A QUALIFIED AGENCY OR ORGANIZATION THAT PROVIDES SUCH PROGRAMS TO PERSONS WHO ABUSE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. EACH PERSON ENROLLED IN A DRUG TREATMENT OR EDUCATION PROGRAM SHALL BE REQUIRED TO PAY FOR HIS OR HER PARTICIPATION IN THE PROGRAM TO THE EXTENT OF HIS OR HER FINANCIAL ABILITY.
  5. A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN PLACED ON PROBATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, WHO IS DETERMINED BY THE COURT TO BE IN VIOLATION OF HIS OR HER PROBATION SHALL HAVE NEW CONDITIONS OF PROBATION ESTABLISHED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: THE COURT SHALL SELECT THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS IT DEEMS NECESSARY, INCLUDING INTENSIFIED DRUG TREATMENT, COMMUNITY SERVICE, INTENSIVE PROBATION, HOME ARREST, OR ANY OTHER SUCH SANCTIONS SHORT OF INCARCERATION.
  6. IF PERSON IS CONVICTED A SECOND TIME OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AS DEFINED IN �36-2501, THE COURT MAY INCLUDE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF PROBATION IT DEEMS NECESSARY, INCLUDING INTENSIFIED DRUG TREATMENT, COMMUNITY SERVICE, INTENSIVE PROBATION, HOME ARREST, OR ANY OTHER ACTION WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT.
  7. A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN CONVICTED THREE TIMES OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AS DEFINED IN �36-2501 SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PROBATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, BUT INSTEAD SHALL BE SENTENCED PURSUANT TO THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF TITLE 13, CHAPTER 34.

Section 11.

Title 13, Chapter 9, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding �13-901.02 to read as follows:

�13-901.02. DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND

  1. THERE IS HEREBY CREATED A SPECIAL FUND WHICH SHALL BE CALLED THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF SUPREME COURT.
  2. FIFTY (50) PERCENT OF THE MONIES DEPOSITED IN THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND SHALL BE DISTRIBUTED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE SUPREME COURT TO THE SUPERIOR COURT PROBATION DEPARTMENTS TO COVER THE COSTS OF PLACING PERSONS IN DRUG EDUCATION AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY A QUALIFIED AGENCY OR ORGANIZATION THAT PROVIDES SUCH PROGRAMS TO PERSONS WHO ABUSE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. SUCH MONIES SHALL BE ALLOCATED TO SUPERIOR COURT PROBATION DEPARTMENTS ACCORDING TO A FORMULA BASED ON PROBATION CASELOAD TO BE ESTABLISHED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE SUPREME COURT.
  3. FIFTY (50) PERCENT OF THE MONIES DEPOSITED IN THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND SHALL BE TRANSFERRED TO THE ARIZONA PARENTS COMMISSION ON DRUG EDUCATION AND PREVENTION ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO �41-1604.16.
  4. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE SUPREME COURT SHALL CAUSE TO BE PREPARED AT THE END OF EACH FISCAL YEAR AFTER 1997 AN ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT CARD THAT DETAILS THE COST SAVINGS REALIZED FROM THE DIVERSION OF PERSONS FROM PRISONS TO PROBATION. A COPY OF THE REPORT SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNOR AND THE LEGISLATURE, AND A COPY OF THE REPORT SHALL BE SENT TO EACH PUBLIC LIBRARY IN THE STATE. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE SUPREME COURT SHALL RECEIVE REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND FOR ANY ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IT INCURS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS ACT.

Section 12.

Title 42, Chapter 12 is amended by adding �42-1204.01 as follows:

�42-1204.01. LUXURY PRIVILEGES TAX; PURPOSE; DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS REVOLVING FUND

  1. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, SEVEN (7) PERCENT OF THE MONIES COLLECTED BETWEEN JANUARY 1, 1997 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999, PURSUANT TO �42-1204 SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 1, AND EIGHTEEN (18) PERCENT OF MONIES COLLECTED BETWEEN JANUARY 1, 1997 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999, PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPHS 2, 3, AND 4, SHALL BE DEPOSITED IN THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO �13-902.02.
  2. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, THREE (3) PERCENT OF THE MONIES COLLECTED BETWEEN JANUARY 1, 1997 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999, PURSUANT TO SECTION �42-1204 SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 1, AND SEVEN (7) PERCENT OF MONIES COLLECTED BETWEEN JANUARY 1, 1997 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999, PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPHS 2, 3. AND 4, SHALL BE DEPOSITED IN A SEPARATE REVOLVING FUND OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS FOR PAYMENT OF THE EXPENSES OF IMPLEMENTING THE PROVISIONS OF �31-411.01, AND SHALL NOT REVERT TO THE STATE GENERAL FUND IF UNEXPENDED AT THE CLOSE OF THE FISCAL YEAR.
  3. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LAW TO THE CONTRARY, TEN (10) PERCENT OF THE MONIES COLLECTED AFTER DECEMBER 31, 1999 PURSUANT TO �42-1204 SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 1, AND TWENTY FIVE (25) PERCENT OF THE MONIES COLLECTED AFTER DECEMBER 31, 1999 PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPHS 2, 3, AND 4, SHALL BE DEPOSITED IN THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO �13-902.02.

Section 13. Severability

If any provision of this Act, or part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining sections shall not be affected but shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of the Act are severable.

ANALYSIS BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

(In compliance with A.R.S. section 19-124)

Proposition 200 would require that certain persons who are convicted of drug offenses be sentenced as follows:

1. Require that persons who commit violent crimes while under the influence of drugs serve 100% of their sentences, without eligibility for parole.

2. Require that persons who have been convicted before the proposition passes of the personal possession or use of a controlled substance such as marijuana and who are serving their sentence in prison be released on parole. A person is released on parole after serving time in jail or prison, is under the supervision of a parole officer and may have his parole revoked if any condition of parole is violated. The State Department of Corrections would be required to establish a procedure for paroling these persons. The Board of Executive Clemency would be required to release these persons unless the Board determines that a person would be a danger to the general public. Persons who are released on parole would be required to participate in drug treatment or education.

3. Require that persons who are convicted after the proposition passes of the personal possession or use of a controlled substance such as marijuana be eligible for probation. A person who is sentenced to probation does not serve any time in jail or prison, is under the supervision of a probation officer and remains free as long as the person continues his good behavior. A person on probation would be required to participate in a drug treatment or education program.

Proposition 200 would allow medical doctors to prescribe a controlled substance such as marijuana to treat a disease or to relieve the pain and suffering of a seriously or terminally ill patient. The doctor must be able to document that scientific research supports the use of the controlled substance and must obtain a written opinion from a second doctor that prescribing the controlled substance is appropriate. A patient who receives, possesses or uses a controlled substance as prescribed by a doctor would not be subject to criminal penalties.

Proposition 200 would establish the Drug Treatment and Education Fund. These monies would come from a percentage of the luxury tax on alcohol, cigarettes and other tobacco products. 50% of these monies would be transferred to Superior Court probation departments to cover the costs of placing persons in drug education and treatment programs. The remaining 50% of the monies would be transferred to the Arizona Parents Commission on Drug Education and Prevention.

Proposition 200 would establish an Arizona Parents Commission on Drug Education and Prevention. The Commission would be responsible for funding programs that increase and enhance parental involvement in drug education and treatment.

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

During my service in the Reagan Administration, I was able to participate directly in their efforts to reduce the size of government. This philosophy has broad appeal today and politicians of both parties are searching for ways to make government more efficient.

However, one area that politicians seem reluctant to examine is that of our failed drug policies. We are spending billions for prisons to incarcerate low level drug users. In the federal prison system, 61 percent of the inmates are in for drug offenses. Of the drug offenders serving in state prisons, 38 percent of them are in for simple drug possession. Nationally, the cost to build a new prison bed averages $40,000 and the cost to maintain it averages $30,000 per year.

The results would be different if prison was a disincentive to using drugs. But most wardens say that it is impossible to eradicate drugs from the prison system. A friend of mine in law enforcement once told me that the prisoners would take the “do drugs, do time” bumper stickers and slice them in half to more accurately read “do time, do drugs.” HBO recently issued a documentary which featured veteran prisoners in the prison teaching younger prisoners how to manufacture methamphetamine.

I am supporting the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act because I believe we must reform our drug policy. The Act mandates that first and second time offenders convicted of simple possession or use will receive treatment and probation as an alternative to incarceration. Treatments costs 1/8 of the cost of prison time and is certain to have a better result than incarceration during which many addicts continue to use drugs at public expense. Most importantly, the money saved on the prison spending can be invested in drug prevention for our youth.

John Norton

Former U. S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture

Chairman, Arizonans for Drug Reform

Paradise Valley

Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform: John Norton, Chairman

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

When John Kennedy was elected President, he asked Stewart Udall, Congressman from Tucson, to be his Secretary of the Interior. Stewart brought a small cadre of Arizonans to work for him in Washington. I was lucky enough to be in the group–as Special Assistant to the Solicitor.

Young people serving in the Kennedy Administration met twice a month in an informal group called the New Frontier Club. I remember at one meeting having an extensive discussion about our drug laws. There was general consensus that the criminalization of narcotic drug use was not working — just as prohibition didn’t work. We were concerned that the Government was spending a lot of money and the situation was only getting worse. I thought that the laws would be reformed soon since their failure was so obvious. That was 34 years ago!

Today, the failed drug war continues. At the state level drug control spending is over $16 billion with 80% going to the criminal justice system, and 20% to education and treatment. We need to reverse these priorities so that we spend at least the same amount on treatment and education to what we spend on enforcement and prisons.

The Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act seeks to equalize the spending on treatment and education. Rather than wasting money on prison for minor drug users, the Act invests in treatment for users and prevention for our youth.

There is strong evidence that this approach will be more effective. A Rand Corporation study in 1994 found that treatment is much more effective than enforcement and prisons in reducing cocaine use. It is time to adopt rational, cost-effective measures that deal with drugs in ways that benefit rather than harm society.

Marvin S. Cohen

Former Chairman, Civil Aeronautics Board

Treasurer, Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform\

Phoenix

Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform: John Norton, Chairman

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

Marijuana has been known for decades to help in treating the terminally and seriously ill patient. Because of the value of marijuana as a drug, the American Medical Association vigorously opposed the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 which made it impossible for doctors to prescribe this drug for their patients. Modern research shows marijuana helps cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy; treats glaucoma; prevents convulsions; arrests severe muscle spasms in patients with neuromuscular disorders; stimulates appetite in AIDS patients. Last year the American Public Health Association urged the “Administration and Congress to move expeditiously to make cannabis available as a legal medicine where shown to be safe and effective.” In 1988, the Drug Enforcement Agency’s own administrative law judge, Francis L. Young, declared marijuana fulfilled the legal requirement of currently accepted medical use in treatment, adding it was “one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.”

Yet today, doctors still cannot help patients for whom all other medicines have failed and marijuana may have scientifically-proven benefit. The edicts that tie their hands are not passed down by physicians or research scientists, but by government bureaucrats and political appointees.

The Drug Medicalization, Prevention and Control Act of 1996 lets doctors help their seriously and terminally ill patients for whom all other options have failed, by prescribing marijuana as a medical therapy in those situations. It does this judiciously and responsibly. The prescribing doctor must obtain a second physician’s opinion. Prescription and drug use must follow accepted medical standards under the purview of the Arizona Board of Medical Examiners. There must be documented scientific evidence of potential benefit.

The Drug Medicalization, Prevention and Control Act of 1996 is a moderate, well-reasoned proposal that enhances the physician’s ability to help suffering patients. It deserves our strong support.

Jeffrey A. Singer, MD, FACS

Phoenix

William J. Rice, MD

Phoenix

Mark R. Mathews, MD

Scottsdale

Ross Levatter, MD

Phoenix

Walter Koppenbrink, MD

Paradise Valley

Charles Goldstein, MD, DIP.ABEM

Paradise Valley

Jeffrey D. Steier, MD

Paradise Valley

Linda B. Benaderet, DO, FACOI

Phoenix

Thomas J. McNaughton, MD Phoenix
Tali Arik, MD, FACC, FACP

Scottsdale

Guy M. Kezirian, MD, FACS

Scottsdale

Michael Lubin, MD

Phoenix

Barbara J. Merz, MD

Phoenix

Lawrence Liebmann, MD

Phoenix

James T. Carver, PhD

Phoenix

Raymond C. Malone, MD

Green Valley

Joel E. Colley, MD

Scottsdale

David L. Elliott, MD

Phoenix

Mark L. Williams, MD

Scottsdale

Charles T. Williams, MD

Phoenix

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

As a former prosecutor and U.S. Senator, I have spent my life fighting against drugs. I am supporting the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act because it will help strengthen Arizona’s drug control.

By placing small, personal drug users into treatment and probation, the Act will clear up prison space for violent criminals and drug dealers. The Act also creates a Parents Commission on Drug Education and Prevention. This Commission will seek more drug education for parents and greater parental involvement in drug prevention.

The Act requires violent drug offenders to serve 100 percent of their sentence and has a three-strikes-and-you’re-out clause. I urge you to vote Yes on the Drug Medicalization Prevention, and Control Act. It’s a better way.

Dennis DeConcini

United States Senator (Ret.)

Bethesda, Maryland

Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform: John Norton, Chairman

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

As a former cop, I have seen the failure of our drug policies on the street.

As a former U.S. Attorney, I have seen the failure of our drug policies in the courts.

And as a parent, I am afraid that if we don’t do something different, my children might be the next victims.

That’s why I am backing the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act which is a new and effective way of controlling drugs. The Act adopts a get tough, get smart approach.

The Act gets tough on dangerous, violent drug offenders. It requires them to serve 100% of their sentence. In addition, judges may be more likely to sentence these offenders to longer sentences because the people have identified them as a menace.

That Act will also have an impact on other violent and dangerous offenders. Arizona suffers from an immense prison crisis. This overcrowding has had a chilling effect on sentencing. The Act will free up needed prison space for violent offenders and drug dealers.

The Act gets smart by investing money in prevention programs, not wasting it on prison for minor drug users. It creates the Arizona Parents Commission on Drug Education and Prevention. The Commission will fund programs for parent drug education and develop drug prevention programs which will increase parental involvement. After all, if we parents don’t get involved, we’re never going to reduce drug abuse among our children.

So I urge you to vote yes on the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act, it’s a new and better way of dealing with our drug problem.

Steve Mitchell

Former Asst. U.S. Attorney and Law Enforcement Officer

Phoenix

Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform: John Norton, Chairman

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

The “Drug Medicalization, Prevention and Control Act” deserves support. Drug abuse is a public health issue. We need to medicalize our drug policy and put more emphasis on drug prevention and treatment. The current approach to drug policy is not working. The most recent government numbers show that marijuana use among our youth (12-17) increased by several hundred percent over the last couple of years. We need to invest more money on drug treatment and prevention for our youth and spend less money on prisons for simple, nonviolent drug users. This Act will free up more prison space for drug dealers and violent offenders.

This initiative also has medical benefits. Medicalization means that we treat drug abuse as a public health issue. Drug abuse is a disease; throwing heavy prison sentences at users does not solve their problem. This Act calls for mandatory, court-supervised treatment and probation as an alternative for non-violent drug users. It provides expanded drug prevention programs. It will also allow doctors to prescribe controlled drugs such as marijuana for seriously and terminally ill patients.

This reform is not decriminalization. This Act only applies to people who are convicted of personal possession or use of a controlled substance. Dealers would continue to be rigorously prosecuted and incarcerated, and persons who commit violent crimes while on drugs would receive tougher penalties, up to 100% of their sentence. Drug users would still receive criminal penalties, probation, and mandatory court-supervised treatment.

This Act only applies to non-violent drug offenders. Offenders with a violent criminal history would be ineligible.

This initiative will save money and, more importantly, help break the cycle of “do drugs – do time – do drugs” by a more crime-effective approach to drug users. As a judge, I feel it deserves support.

Rudolph J. Gerber, Judge

Court of Appeals

Phoenix

Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform: John Norton, Chairman

ARGUMENT “FOR” PROPOSITION 200

Drug abuse is not just a criminal justice problem, it is first a public health problem. Addiction to controlled substances is a disease. If our drug policy was really a “War” as some claim, we would demand a new strategy or court-martial the general. Polling shows that over 90% of Arizonans believe we are losing the War on Drugs. Perhaps this is why our new Drug Czar, General McCaffrey, has said, “war” is the wrong metaphor and that the drug problem is a “cancer.”

Sending minor drug users to prison draws resources from society and does nothing for the addict. There are drugs in the prison system. Often, prisoners simply continue their addiction in prison and are released back into society.

Minor drug users are the fastest growing group in Arizona prison, out pacing even violent offenders and drug dealers. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of mere users in Arizona prisons increased by 658. The cost of each new prison bed in Arizona is $35,000 and it costs $18,000 to maintain it. So the net cost of these new addicts to the state over the last two years is $46.7 million, not to mention the cost to maintain the 1300 existing beds taken up by drug users.

I urge your support for the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act of 1996. The Act offers first and second time offenders who are convicted of personal possession or use of a controlled substance drug treatment and probation. This treatment costs one-eighth that of prisons. Most importantly, drug users who can work while under treatment remain taxpayers and are not severed from their families who can offer vital support in recovery. The Act will also invest resources in drug prevention for youth which emphasizes parental involvement.

Dr. John Sperling

President, Apollo Group Inc.

Phoenix

ARGUMENT “AGAINST” PROPOSITION 200

This proposition sounds deceptively appealing, but it gives less freedom with the one hand than it takes away with the other.

Proposition 200 contains some libertarian-sounding provisions that would restore a measure of freedom that has been denied by current drug laws — such as allowing the medical use of controlled substances to alleviate pain and suffering, and treatment instead of incarceration for non-violent drug users. Cost reductions in our prisons sound good, too.

But, on balance, this proposition is anti-freedom — and certainly anti-responsibility.

Proposition 200 creates another tax-hungry government entity (a Parents Commission) and creates compulsory business for the lucrative (and highly ineffectual) “drug abuse treatment” industry. Convicted drug users must undergo treatment as a requirement of Proposition 200 (whether they need it or not). If they can’t pay for their own treatment, we, the taxpayers, pick up the tab.

It’s high time government stopped treating responsible adults as children.

If you care about the suffering of patients who are denied the medical benefits of controlled drugs�

If you care about the lives wasted in prison for the mere possession of recreational substances…

If you want real, meaningful drug reform…

… then stop prosecuting people for using drugs. Control the sale of drugs just as we now control the sale of alcohol and tobacco.

Suddenly there will be room in our jails for truly violent offenders.

Suddenly there will be far fewer violent crimes, when drugs are no longer worth fighting over, stealing for, or pushing on our children.

Vote “NO” on 200.

Kent B. Van Cleave

Libertarian Candidate for

State Representative

District 25

Phoenix

Scott Grainger

Libertarian Candidate for

State Representative

District 21

Mesa

Robert Anderson

Libertarian Candidate for

U.S. Congress

District 6

Phoenix

John Williams

Libertarian Candidate for

State Senate

District 25

Phoenix

Rickie Duncan

Libertarian Candidate for

State Senate

District 20

Phoenix

Ted Louis Glenn

Libertarian Candidate for

Pima County Supervisor

District 4

Tucson

Ernest Hancock

Libertarian Candidate for

State Representative

District 18

Phoenix

John Wilde

Libertarian Candidate for

State Representative

District 20

Phoenix

Maricopa County

Libertarian Party

Steering Committee

Mesa

Donna Hancock

Libertarian Candidate for

State Senate

District 18

Phoenix

BALLOT FORMAT


PROPOSITION 200


PROPOSED BY INITIATIVE PETITION


OFFICIAL TITLE



AMENDING TITLE 13, TITLE 41, AND TITLE 42,OF THE ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 11, BY ADDING �41-1604.16; RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ARIZONA PARENTS COMMISSION ON DRUG EDUCATION AND PREVENTION; AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 11, BY ADDING �41-1604.14; RELATING TO PERSONS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE; AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 13, BY AMENDING �13-3412 AND ADDING �13-3412.01; RELATING TO PERMISSIBLE USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES BY SERIOUSLY ILL OR TERMINALLY ILL PATIENTS; AMENDING TITLE 41, CHAPTER 11, BY ADDING �41-1604.15 AND AMENDING TITLE 31, CHAPTER 3, BY ADDING �31-411.01; RELATING TO PAROLE FOR PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES; AMENDING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 9, BY ADDING �13-901.01; RELATING TO PROBATION FOR PERSONS CONVICTED OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND BY ADDING �13-901.02; RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION FUND; AND AMENDING TITLE 42, CHAPTER 12, BY ADDING �42-1204.01; RELATING TO LUXURY PRIVILEGE TAXES; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY.


DESCRIPTIVE TITLE


REQUIRING PERSONS ON DRUGS COMMITTING VIOLENT CRIMES TO SERVE ENTIRE SENTENCE; PROVIDING PAROLE/PROBATION AND TREATMENT AS ALTERNATIVE TO INCARCERATION FOR PERSONS CONVICTED ONLY OF PERSONAL POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE ON FIRST TWO OFFENSES; ALLOWING DOCTORS TO PRESCRIBE OTHERWISE ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES FOR CERTAIN PATIENTS; CREATING DRUG-RELATED FUND AND COMMISSION.



PROPOSITION 200


A “yes” vote shall have the effect of requiring entire sentence to be served by persons who commit violent crimes while on drugs, changing sentences for persons convicted of possession or use of controlled substances, and allowing doctors to prescribe otherwise illegal substances for certain patients. YES
A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the current laws on controlled substances. NO

Elections Home |Secretary of State Home Page



Categories
Articles

A Guide to Drug-Related State Ballot Initiatives

Full Text
back to summary


Utah Property Protection Act
2000

AN ACT RELATING TO FORFEITURE OF ASSETS AND PROPERTY; ESTABLISHING UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR THE FORFEITURE OF PROPERTY; FORBIDDING FORFEITURE AGAINST INNOCENT OWNERS; PERMITTING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS TO SEIZE CONTRABAND AND THE PROCEEDS AND INSTRUMENTALITIES OF CRIME; AND PROVIDING THAT ALL PROPERTY, ASSETS, MONEY OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE WHICH ARE LAWFULLY SEIZED AND FORFEITED BE SOLD OR AUCTIONED AND THAT ALL MONIES WHICH RESULT FROM THE SALE OF FORFEITED ASSETS BE DEPOSITED IN THE UNIFORM SCHOOL FUND.

This Act affects sections of Utah Code Annotated 1953 as follows:

ENACTS: 

24-1-1et seq., Utah Code Annotated 1953.

AMENDS: 

23-20-1 as last amended by Chapters 140 and 282, Laws of Utah 1998

32A-13-103 as last amended by Chapter 5, Laws of Utah 1991

41-6-13.7 as last amended by Chapter 198, Laws of Utah 1996

53-10-303 as last amended by Chapter 36, Laws of Utah 1996 and renumbered by Chapter 263, Laws of Utah 1998

53A-16-101 as last amended by Chapter 38, Laws of Utah 1997

58-37-13 as last amended by Chapters 198 and 294, Laws of Utah 1996

58-37-20 as last amended by Chapter 36, Laws of Utah 1996.

58-37a-6 as enacted by Chapter 76, Laws of Utah 1981, declared unconstitutional by 10th Circuit (742 F.2d 564, 1984), repealed by Utah Code Ann. � 63-55-258 (effective date July 1, 2007)

58-37c-15 as enacted by Chapter 155, Laws of Utah 1992

58-37d-7 as enacted by Chapter 156, Laws of Utah 1992

59-14-207 as enacted by Chapter 58, Laws of Utah 1986 and renumbered by Chapter 2, Laws of Utah 1987

63-30-7 as enacted by Chapter 139, Laws of Utah 1965

76-3-501 as last amended by Chapter 97, Laws of Utah 1999

76-10-1107 as enacted by Chapter 196, Laws of Utah 1973

76-10-1108 as enacted by Chapter 196, Laws of Utah 1973

76-10-1603.5 as last amended by Chapter 38, Laws of Utah 1993

76-10-1908 as last amended by Chapter 198, Laws of Utah 1996

Be it enacted by the people of the State of Utah:

Section 1. Section 24-1-1 is enacted to read:

24-1-1. Title. This chapter shall be cited as the “Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act.”

Section 2. Section 24-1-2 is enacted to read:

24-1-2. Purpose. It is the intent of this chapter to:

(1) provide for a uniform set of procedures and substantive standards for the criminal and civil forfeiture of property within the State of Utah;

(2) permit law enforcement personnel to deter crime by lawfully seizing and forfeiting contraband and the instrumentalities and proceeds of criminal conduct;

(3) protect innocent owners from the wrongful taking of their property;

(4) ensure that seizures and forfeitures of property from private citizens are not disproportionate to the violation or crime committed;

(5) ensure direct control and accountability over the use and sale of forfeited property and the proceeds generated therefrom; and

(6) direct that any and all revenues resulting from the sale of forfeited property

be contributed to the Uniform School Fund.

Section 3. Section 24-1-3 is enacted to read:

24-1-3. Definitions. As used in this section:

(1) “Agency” shall mean any agency of municipal, county, or state government, including law enforcement agencies, law enforcement personnel, and multi-jurisdictional task forces.

(2) “Contraband” shall mean any property which is unlawful to produce or to possess under state or federal law.

(3) “Multi-jurisdictional task force” shall mean a law enforcement task force or other agency comprised of persons who are employed by or acting under the authority of different governmental authorities, including federal, state, county or municipal governments, or any combination thereof.

(4) “Owner” shall mean any person or entity that possesses a legal or equitable interest in real or personal property, including a security interest.

(5) “Property” shall mean all property, whether real or personal, tangible or intangible.

(6) “Prosecuting Attorney” shall mean the public attorney authorized by a specific provision of state law to initiate forfeiture proceedings under this chapter.

(7) “State law” means all Utah law, including municipal, county and state law.

Section 4. Section 24-1-4 is enacted to read:

24-1-4. Civil Procedures.

(1) An agency which seizes property under any provision of state law subjecting an owner’s property to civil forfeiture shall, as soon as practicable, but in no case more than 30 days after seizure:

(a) prepare a detailed inventory of all property seized and transfer the seized property to a designated official within the agency, who shall be responsible for holding and maintaining seized property pending a court order of release or final determination of forfeiture and disposition of property under this chapter;

(b) notify the prosecuting attorney responsible for initiating civil forfeiture proceedings under this chapter of the items of property seized, the place of the seizure and any persons arrested at the time of seizure; and

(c) give written notice to all owners known, or reasonably discoverable after due diligence, of the following items:

(i) the date of the seizure and the property seized;

(ii) the owner’s rights and obligations under this chapter, including the availability of counsel and hardship relief in appropriate circumstances; and

(iii) an outline of the steps in the proceedings by which property is forfeited under this chapter.

(2) If the seizing agency fails to provide notice as required in subparagraph (1)(c), an owner entitled to notice who does not receive notice may void the forfeiture with respect to the owner’s interest in the property by bringing a motion before the appropriate district court and serving it upon the seizing agency. Such motion may be brought at any time prior to the final disposition of the property under this chapter. If an owner brings a motion to void the forfeiture for lack of notice under subparagraph (1)(c), the court shall void the forfeiture unless the seizing agency demonstrates:

(a) good cause for the failure to give notice to that owner; or

(b) that the owner otherwise had actual notice of the seizure.

(3) (a) Within 90 days of any seizure, the prosecuting attorney shall file a complaint for forfeiture in the appropriate district court and serve a copy of the complaint upon all owners known to the prosecuting attorney to have an interest in the property by one of the following methods:

(i) personal service upon each owner whose name and address is known, or by mailing a copy to the last known address; or

(ii) upon all other owners whose addresses are not known, by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the seizure was made for a period of two consecutive weeks.

(b) The complaint shall describe with reasonable particularity:

(i) the property which is the subject matter of the forfeiture proceeding;

(ii) the date and place of seizure; and

(iii) the allegations which constitute a basis for forfeiture.

(4) If the prosecuting attorney does not timely file a complaint for forfeiture of the property in accordance with subparagraph (3), the agency shall promptly return the property to its owner and the prosecuting attorney shall take no further action to effect the forfeiture of such property. If the agency knows of more than one owner, it shall return the property to the owner who was in possession at the time of the seizure.

(5) In any case where the prosecuting attorney files a complaint for forfeiture of property, an owner may file a claim and an answer to the complaint. The claim and answer shall be filed within 30 days after the complaint is served in person or by mail, or where applicable, within 30 days after publication under subparagraph (3)(a)(ii).

(6) (a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, civil forfeiture proceedings are governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.

(b) The court shall take all reasonable steps to expedite forfeiture proceedings and shall give such proceedings the same priority as is given to criminal cases.

(c) In all suits or actions brought for the civil forfeiture of any property under this chapter, the burden of proof is on the prosecuting attorney to establish, by clear and convincing evidence, to what extent, if any, property is subject to forfeiture.

(d) The right to trial by jury applies to civil forfeiture proceedings.

Section 5. Section 24-1-5 is enacted to read:

24-1-5. No bond required in civil cases. Any person may assert an interest in seized property or file an answer to a complaint for civil forfeiture without posting bond with respect to the property which is the subject of the seizure or forfeiture action.

Section 6. Section 24-1-6 is enacted to read:

24-1-6. Innocent owners.

(1) An innocent owner’s interest in property shall not be forfeited civilly under any provision of state law.

(2) The prosecuting attorney shall have the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that an individual is not an innocent owner.

(3) With respect to an ownership interest in existence at the time the conduct subjecting the property to seizure took place, the term “innocent owner” means an owner who:

(a) did not have actual knowledge of the conduct subjecting the property to seizure; or

(b) upon learning of the conduct subjecting the property to seizure, took reasonable steps to prohibit such use of the property.

(4) For purposes of subparagraph (3)(b), no owner shall be required to take steps that he reasonably believes would be likely to subject any person (other than the person whose conduct gave rise to the forfeiture) to physical harm or danger. An owner may demonstrate that he took reasonable action to prohibit such use of the property by, for example:

(a) timely notifying a law enforcement agency of information that led the owner to know that conduct subjecting the property to seizure would occur, was occurring, or has occurred; or

(b) timely revoking or attempting to revoke permission for those engaging in such conduct to use the property; or

(c) taking reasonable actions to discourage or prevent the illegal use of the property.

(5) With respect to an ownership interest acquired after the conduct subjecting the property to seizure has occurred, the term “innocent owner” means a person who, at the time he acquired the interest in the property, had no knowledge that the illegal conduct subjecting the property to seizure had occurred or that the property had been seized for forfeiture, and:

(a) acquired the property in a bona fide transaction for value;

(b) was a person, including a minor child, who acquired an interest in property through probate or inheritance; or

(c) was a spouse who acquired an interest in property through dissolution of marriage or by operation of law.

(6) No owner may assert, under this paragraph, an ownership interest in contraband.

Section 7. Section 24-1-7 shall be enacted to read:

Section 24-1-7. Hardship Release of Seized Property.

(1) An owner is entitled to the immediate release of seized property from the seizing agency pending the final determination of civil forfeiture if:

(a) the owner has a possessory interest in the property;

(b) continued possession by the agency or the state pending the final disposition of the forfeiture proceedings will cause substantial hardship to the owner, such as:

(i) preventing the functioning of a legitimate business;

(ii) preventing any individual from working;

(iii) preventing any minor child or student from attending school;

(iv) preventing or hindering any person from receiving necessary medical care;

(v) hindering the care of an elderly or disabled dependent child or adult;

(vi) preventing an owner from retaining counsel to provide a defense in the forfeiture proceeding; or

(vii) leaving any individual homeless, or any other condition that the court determines causes a substantial hardship; and

(c) the hardship from the continued possession by the agency of the seized property outweighs the risk that the property will be destroyed, damaged, lost, concealed, or transferred if it is returned to the owner during the pendency of the proceeding.

(2) The right to appointed counsel under Section 24-1-9 applies throughout civil forfeiture proceedings, including an owner’s motion for hardship release. An owner may file a motion for hardship release:

(i) in the court in which forfeiture proceedings have commenced; or

(ii) in any district court having jurisdiction over the property, if forfeiture proceedings have not yet commenced.

(3) The court shall render a decision on a motion or complaint filed under subparagraph (2) not later than 10 days after the date of filing, unless the ten-day period is extended by the consent of the parties or by the court for good cause shown.

(4) If the owner demonstrates substantial hardship pursuant to subparagraph (1), the court shall order the property immediately released to the owner pending completion of proceedings by the government to obtain forfeiture of the property. The court may place such conditions on release of the property as it finds are necessary and appropriate to preserve the availability of the property or its equivalent for forfeiture.

(5) Subparagraph (1) shall not apply if the seized property is:

(a) contraband;

(b) currency or other monetary instrument or electronic funds, unless such property is used to pay for the costs of defending against the forfeiture proceeding or constitutes the assets of a legitimate business; or

(c) likely to be used to commit additional illegal acts if returned to the owner.

Section 8. Section 24-1-8 is enacted to read:

24-1-8. Criminal Procedures.

(1) In cases where an owner is criminally prosecuted for conduct giving rise toforfeiture, the prosecuting attorney may elect to forfeit the owner’s interest in the property civilly or criminally, provided that no civil forfeiture judgment may be entered with respect to the property of a defendant who is acquitted of the offense on which the forfeiture claim is based.

(2) If the prosecuting attorney elects to criminally forfeit the owner’s interest in the property, the information or indictment must state that the owner’s interest in the specifically described property is subject to criminal forfeiture and the basis for the forfeiture.

(3) (a) Upon application of the prosecuting attorney, the court may enter restraining orders or injunctions, or take other reasonable action to preserve for forfeiture under this section any forfeitable property if, after notice to persons known, or discoverable after due diligence, to have an interest in the property and after affording them an opportunity for a hearing, the court determines that:

(i) there is a substantial probability that the state will prevail on the issue of forfeiture and that failure to enter the order will result in the property being sold, transferred, destroyed or removed from the jurisdiction of the court or otherwise made unavailable for forfeiture; and

(ii) the need to preserve the availability of the property or prevent its sale, transfer, destruction or removal through the entry of the requested order outweighs the hardship against any party against whom the order is to be entered.

(b) A temporary restraining order may be entered ex parte upon application of the prosecuting attorney before or after an information or indictment has been filed with respect to the property, if the prosecuting attorney demonstrates that:

(i) there is probable cause to believe that the property with respect to which the order is sought would, in the event of a conviction, be subject to forfeiture under this section; and

(ii) provision of notice would jeopardize the availability of the property for forfeiture or would jeopardize an ongoing criminal investigation.

(c) The temporary order expires not more than 10 days after entry unless extended for good cause shown or unless the party against whom it is entered consents to an extension. An adversarial hearing concerning an order entered under this paragraph shall be held as soon as practicable and prior to the expiration of the temporary order.

(d) The court is not bound by the Utah Rules of Evidence regarding evidence it may receive and consider at any hearing under this paragraph.

(4) (a) Upon conviction by a jury of an owner for conduct giving rise to criminal forfeiture, the jury shall be instructed and asked to return a special verdict as to the extent of the property identified in the information or indictment, if any, that is forfeitable.

(b) Whether property is forfeitable shall be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

(5) Upon conviction of a person for violating any provision of state law subjecting an owner’s property to forfeiture and upon the jury’s special verdict that the property is forfeitable, the court shall enter a judgment and order the property forfeited to the state treasurer upon the terms stated by the court in its order. Following the entry of an order declaring property forfeited, the court may, upon application of the prosecuting attorney, enter appropriate restraining orders or injunctions, require the execution of satisfactory performance bonds, appoint receivers, conservators, appraisers, accountants, or trustees, or take any other action to protect the interest of the state in property ordered forfeited.

(6) (a) After property is ordered forfeited under this section, the state treasurer shall direct the disposition of the property under Section 24-1-16. Any property right or interest not exercisable by or transferable for value to the state expires and does not revert to the defendant. The defendant or any person acting in concert with or on behalf of the defendant is not eligible to purchase forfeited property at any sale held by the state treasurer unless approved by the judge.

(b) The court may stay the sale or disposition of the property pending the conclusion of any appeal of the criminal case giving rise to the forfeiture if the defendant demonstrates that proceeding with the sale or disposition of the property may result in irreparable injury, harm or loss to him.

(7) Except under Subparagraphs (3) or (10), a party claiming an interest in property subject to criminal forfeiture under this section:

(a) may not intervene in a trial or appeal of a criminal case involving the forfeiture of property under this section; and


(b) may not commence an action at law or equity against the state or the county concerning the validity of his alleged interests in the property subsequent to the filing of an indictment or an information alleging that the property is subject to forfeiture under this section.


(8) The district court of the state which has jurisdiction of a case under this part may enter orders under this section without regard to the location of any property which may be subject to forfeiture under this section, or which has been ordered forfeited under this section.


(9) To facilitate the identification or location of property declared forfeited and to facilitate the disposition of petitions for remission or mitigation of forfeiture, after the entry of an order declaring property forfeited to the state treasurer, the court, may upon application of the prosecuting attorney, order that the testimony of any witness relating to the property forfeited be taken by deposition, and that any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material not privileged shall be produced as provided for depositions and discovery under the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.


(10) (a) Following the entry of an order of forfeiture under this section, the prosecuting attorney shall publish notice of the order’s intent to dispose of the property as the court may direct. The prosecuting attorney shall also provide direct written notice to any person known to have an alleged interest in the property subject to the order of forfeiture.


(b) Any person, other than the defendant, asserting a legal interest in property which has been ordered forfeited to the state treasurer under this section may, within 30 days of the final publication of notice or his receipt of written notice under subparagraph (a), whichever is earlier, petition the court for a hearing to adjudicate the validity of his alleged interest in the property. Any genuine issue of material fact, including issues of standing, is triable to a jury upon demand of any party.


(c) The petition shall be in writing and signed by the petitioner under penalty of perjury. It shall set forth the nature and extent of the petitioner’s right, title, or interest in the property, the time and circumstances of the petitioner’s acquisition of the right, title, or interest in the property, and any additional facts supporting the petitioner’s claim and the relief sought.


(d) The trial or hearing on the petition shall be expedited to the extent practicable. The court may consolidate a trial or hearing on the petition and any petition filed by any other person under this section other than the defendant. The court shall permit the parties to conduct pretrial discovery pursuant to the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.


(e) At the trial or hearing, the petitioner may testify and present evidence and witnesses on his own behalf and cross-examine witnesses who appear at the hearing. The prosecuting attorney may present evidence and witnesses in rebuttal and in defense of the claim to the property and cross-examine witnesses who appear. In addition to testimony and evidence presented at the trial or hearing, the court may consider the relevant portion of the record of the criminal case which resulted in the order of forfeiture. Any trial or hearing shall be conducted pursuant to the Utah Rules of Evidence.


(f) The court shall amend the order of forfeiture in accordance with its determination, if after the trial or hearing, the court or jury determines that the petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that:


(i) the petitioner has a legal right, title, or interest in the property, and the right, title, or interest renders the order of forfeiture invalid in whole or in part because the right, title, or interest was vested in the petitioner rather than the defendant or was superior to any right, title, or interest of the defendant at the time of the commission of the acts or conduct which gave rise to the forfeiture of the property under this section; or


(ii) the petitioner acquired the right, title or interest in the property in a bona fide transaction for value and, at the time of such acquisition, the petitioner did not know that the property was subject to forfeiture.


(g) Following the court’s disposition of all petitions filed under this paragraph, or if no petitions are filed following the expiration of the period provided in subparagraph (b) for the filing of petitions, the state treasurer has clear title to property subject to the order of forfeiture and may warrant good title to any subsequent purchaser or transferee.

Section 9. Section 24-1-9 is enacted to read:

24-1-9. Appointment of counsel for indigent claimants in civil and criminal forfeiture proceedings.

(1) The court may appoint counsel to represent indigent persons in civil and criminal forfeiture proceedings, including owners in criminal forfeiture proceedings who are not charged as criminal defendants. In determining whether to appoint counsel, the court shall take into account such factors as:

(a) the person’s asserted interest in the property;

(b) the person’s standing to contest the forfeiture; and

(c) whether the person’s allegations appear to be in good faith or to be frivolous.

(2) The court shall set compensation for counsel in forfeiture proceedings at a level equivalent to compensation provided for counsel appointed in criminal cases.

Section 10. Section 24-1-10 is enacted to read:

Section 24-1-10. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. In any civil or criminal proceeding to forfeit currency or other negotiable instruments under this chapter, the court shall award a prevailing owner pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the currency or negotiable instruments at the legal rate of interest established by Section 15-1-1 of the Utah Code.

Section 11. Section 24-1-11 is enacted to read:

Section 24-1-11. Attorneys’ fees and costs. In any civil or criminal proceeding to forfeit seized property under this chapter, the court shall award a prevailing owner reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs of suit reasonably incurred by the owner. An owner who prevails only in part shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and reasonable costs of suit related to those issues on which he prevailed.

Section 12. Section 24-1-12 is enacted to read:

Section 24-1-12. Compensation for Damaged Property.

(1) In any civil or criminal proceeding, an owner shall have a private right of action against a seizing agency for any claim based upon the negligent destruction, loss, damage or other injury to seized property while in the possession or custody of a state agency, if the property was seized for the purpose of initiating forfeiture proceedings under this chapter.

(2) For the purposes of this section, “damage or other injury” does not include normal depreciation, deterioration or ordinary wear and tear.

Section 13. Section 24-1-13 is enacted to read:

Section 24-1-13. Limitation on Fees for Holding Seized Property. In any civil or criminal proceeding under this chapter in which a judgment is entered in favor of an owner, or where a forfeiture proceeding against an owner is voluntarily dismissed by the prosecuting attorney, the seizing agency shall be prohibited from charging that owner any fee for holding seized property.

Section 14. Section 24-1-14 shall be enacted to read:

Section 24-1-14. Proportionality. An owner’s interest in property, excluding contraband, shall not be civilly or criminally forfeited under a provision of state law unless such forfeiture is substantially proportional to both the use of the property in committing or facilitating a violation of state law and the value of the property. Forfeiture of property used solely in a manner that is merely incidental and not instrumental to the commission or facilitation of a violation of law is not proportional, as a matter of law. The prosecuting attorney has the burden to demonstrate that any forfeiture is proportional to an alleged violation of state law. It is the province of the court, not the jury, to decide questions of proportionality.

Section 15. Section 24-1-15 is enacted to read:

Section 24-1-15. Transfer and Sharing Procedures.

(1) For purposes of Section 24-1-15, property is deemed to be “seized” whenever any agency takes possession of the property or exercises any degree of control over the property.

(2) (a) Transfer of Seized Property. Seizing agencies or prosecuting attorneys authorized to bring civil or criminal forfeiture proceedings under this chapter shall not directly or indirectly transfer seized property to any federal agency or any governmental entity not created under and subject to state law unless the court enters an order, upon petition of the prosecuting attorney, authorizing the property to be transferred. The court may not enter an order authorizing a transfer unless:

(i) the activity giving rise to the investigation or seizure is interstate in nature and sufficiently complex to justify such transfer;

(ii) the seized property may only be forfeited under federal law; or

(iii) pursuing forfeiture under state law would unduly burden prosecuting attorneys or state law enforcement agencies.

(b) Notwithstanding Subparagraph 2(a), the court may refuse to enter an order authorizing a transfer to the federal government if such transfer would circumvent the protections of the Utah Constitution or this chapter that would otherwise be available to the property owner.

(c) Prior to granting any order to transfer pursuant to subparagraph (2)(a), the court must give any owner the right to be heard with regard to the transfer.

(3) (a) Sharing of Seized Property. All property, money or other things of value received by an agency pursuant to federal law which authorizes the sharing or transfer of all or a portion of forfeited property or the proceeds of the sale of forfeited property to an agency shall be promptly transferred to the state treasurer and sold and deposited in the Uniform School Fund as provided under Section 24-1-16.

(b) Subject to subparagraph (3)(a), state agencies are encouraged to seek an equitable share of property forfeited by the federal government and to cooperate with federal law enforcement agencies in all cases in which such cooperation is in the interest of this state.

(4) Any agency that violates subparagraph (2) or (3) is civilly liable to the state for three times the amount of the forfeiture diverted and for costs of suit and reasonable attorneys’ fees. Any damages awarded to the state shall be paid to the Uniform School Fund. Any agent, including state law enforcement officers who are detached to, deputized or commissioned by, or working in conjunction with a federal agency, who knowingly transfers or otherwise trades seized property in violation of subparagraph (2)(a) or who receives property, money or other things of value under subparagraph 3(a) and knowingly fails to transfer such property to the state treasurer is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor.

Section 16. Section 24-1-16 is enacted to read:

Section 24-1-16. Disposition of proceeds from criminal or civil forfeiture.

(1) When any property is civilly or criminally forfeited under this chapter by a finding of the court that no person is entitled to recover the property, the property shall be sold by the state treasurer, or destroyed if unfit for sale, and all revenue or proceeds therefrom shall be deposited in the Uniform School Fund after deducting the costs and expenses of:

(a) maintaining and storing the forfeited property;

(b) administering the forfeiture proceeding;

(c) appointed counsel under Section 24-1-9; and

(c) payment of money to compensate victims of conduct giving rise to or related to the forfeiture, or of conduct which is part of the same scheme that led to the forfeiture under this chapter.

(2) No property either seized or forfeited, whether civilly or criminally, nor any revenues or proceeds therefrom shall be paid to, appropriated for, or used for the benefit, directly or indirectly, of law enforcement officers, law enforcement agencies or agencies performing law enforcement functions.

(3) No property either seized or forfeited, whether civilly or criminally, nor any revenue or proceeds therefrom shall be, directly or indirectly, paid to, appropriated for, or used for the benefit of persons acting as:

(a) informants in any law enforcement function;

(b) witnesses in any administrative or judicial forum; or

(c) prosecutors in any state or federal actions.

(4) The state treasurer shall maintain an accounting of all properties which are either civilly or criminally forfeited and subsequently sold and all proceeds therefrom, and the state auditor shall perform an annual audit of such proceeds and communicate the results of the audit to the state treasurer and to the legislature. All accounting and audit records generated under this subparagraph shall be available and open to the public.

Section 17. Section 23-20-1 is amended to read:

23-20-1. Enforcement authority of conservation officers — Seizure and disposition of property.

(1) Conservation officers of the division shall enforce the provisions of this title with the same authority and following the same procedures as other law enforcement officers.

(2) (a) Conservation officers shall seize any protected wildlife illegally taken or held.

(b) (i) Upon determination of a defendant’s guilt by the court, the protected wildlife shall be confiscated by the court and sold or otherwise disposed of by the division.

(ii) Proceeds of the sales shall be deposited in the Wildlife Resources Account.

(iii) Migratory wildfowl may not be sold, but must be given to a charitable institution or used for other charitable purposes.

(3) [(a)] Materials and devices used for the unlawful taking or possessing of protected wildlife shall be seized, and upon a finding by the court that they were used in the unlawful taking or possessing of protected wildlife, the materials and devices shall be[:

(i) confiscated by the court;


(ii) conveyed to the division; and


(iii) upon the expiration of time for appeal, sold at a public auction or otherwise disposed of by the division.
] subject to criminal or civil forfeiture under the procedures and substantive protections established in the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code.

[(b) Any proceeds from the sale of the material or device shall be deposited into the Wildlife Resources Account.]

[(4) (a) (i) As used in Subsection (4), “owner” means a person, other than a person with a security interest, having a property interest in or title to a vehicle and entitled to the use and possession of a vehicle.
(ii) “Owner” includes a renter or lessee of a vehicle.
(b) (i)]  

(4) (a) Conservation officers may seize and impound a vehicle used for the unlawful taking or possessing of protected wildlife for any of the following purposes:

[(A)] (i) to provide for the safekeeping of the vehicle, if the owner or operator is arrested;

[(B)] (ii) to search the vehicle as provided in Subsection (2)(a) or as provided by a search warrant; or

[(C)] (iii) to inspect the vehicle for evidence that protected wildlife was unlawfully taken or possessed.

[(ii)] (b) The division shall store any seized vehicle in a public or private garage, state impound lot, or other secured storage facility.

[(iii)] (5) A seized vehicle shall be released to the owner no later than 30 days after the date the vehicle is seized, unless the vehicle was used for the unlawful taking or possessing of wildlife by a person who is charged with committing a felony under this title.

[(c) (i)] (6) (a) Upon a finding by a court that the person who used the vehicle for the unlawful taking or possessing of wildlife is guilty of a felony under this title, the vehicle may be[:

(A) confiscated by the court;


(B) conveyed to the division; and


(C) upon expiration of time for appeal, sold at a public auction or otherwise disposed of by the division.


(ii) Any proceeds from the sale shall be deposited into the Wildlife Resources Account.


(iii) If the vehicle is not confiscated by the court, it shall be released to the owner.
] subject to criminal or civil forfeiture under the procedures and substantive protections established in the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code.


[(d) (i)
] (b) The owner of a seized vehicle is liable for the payment of any impound fee if he [the person who] used the vehicle for the unlawful taking or possessing of wildlife and is found by a court to be guilty of a violation of this title.

[(ii)] (c) The owner of a seized vehicle is not liable for the payment of any impound fee or, if the fees have been paid, is entitled to reimbursement of the fees paid, if:

[(A)] (i) no charges are filed or all charges are dropped which involve the use of the vehicle for the unlawful taking or possessing of wildlife; [or]

[(B)] (ii) the person charged with using the vehicle for the unlawful taking or possessing of wildlife is found by a court to be not guilty[.]; or

(iii) the owner did not consent to a use of the vehicle which violates this chapter.

Section 18. Section 32A-13-103 is amended to read:

32A-13-103. Searches, seizures, and forfeitures.
(1) The following are subject to forfeiture [and no property right exists in them] pursuant to the procedures and substantive protections established in the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code:

(a) all alcoholic products possessed, used, offered for sale, sold, given, furnished, supplied, received, purchased, stored, warehoused, manufactured, adulterated, shipped, carried, transported, or distributed in violation of this title or commission rules;

(b) all packages or property used or intended for use as a container for an alcoholic product in violation of this title or commission rules;

(c) all raw materials, products, and equipment used, or intended for use, in manufacturing, processing, adulterating, delivering, importing, or exporting any alcoholic product in violation of this title or commission rules;

(d) all implements, furniture, fixtures, or other personal property used or kept for any violation of this title or commission rules;

(e) all conveyances including aircraft, vehicles, or vessels used or intended for use, to transport or in any manner facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment of property described in Subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d)[, except that:
(i) a conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in the transaction of business as a common carrier may not be forfeited under this section unless it appears that the owner or other person in charge of the conveyance was a consenting party or privy to had knowledge of a violation of this title or commission rules;
(ii) a conveyance may not be forfeited under this section by reason of any act or omission established by the owner to have been committed or omitted without the owner’s knowledge or consent; and
(iii) any forfeiture of a conveyance subject to a bona fide security interest shall be subject to the interest of the secured party upon the party’s showing that the party could not have known did not know in the exercise of reasonable diligence that a violation would take place in the use of the conveyance]; and

(f) all books, records, receipts, ledgers, or other documents used or intended for use in violation of this title or commission rules.

(2) Any of the property subject to forfeiture under this title may be seized by any peace officer of this state or any other person authorized by law upon process issued by any court having jurisdiction over the property in accordance with the procedures provided in Title 77, Chapter 23, Part 2, Search Warrants. However, seizure without process may be made when:

(a) the seizure is incident to an arrest or search under a search warrant or an inspection under an administrative inspection warrant;

(b) the property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding under this title;

(c) the peace officer or other person authorized by law has probable cause to believe that the property is directly or indirectly dangerous to health or safety; or

(d) the peace officer or other person authorized by law has probable cause to believe that the property is being or has been used, intended to be used, held, or kept in violation of this title or commission rules.

(3) If the property is seized pursuant to a search or administrative warrant, the peace officer or other person authorized by law shall make a proper receipt, return, and inventory and ensure the safekeeping of the property as required by Sections 77-23-206 through 77-23-208, Utah Code of Criminal Procedure. If the magistrate who issued the warrant is a justice court judge, upon the filing of the return the jurisdiction of the justice court shall cease and the magistrate shall certify the record and all files without delay to the district court of the county in which the property was located. From the time of this filing, the district court has jurisdiction of the case.

(4) In the event of seizure of property without process, the peace officer or other person authorized by law shall make a return of his acts without delay directly to the district court of the county in which the property was located, and the district court shall have jurisdiction of the case. The return shall describe all property seized, the place where it was seized, and any persons in apparent possession of the property. The officer or other person shall also promptly deliver a written inventory of anything seized to any person in apparent authority at the premises where the seizure was made, or post it in a conspicuous place at the premises. The inventory shall state the place where the property is being held.

[(5) Any peace officer or other person authorized by law who seizes any property subject to seizure under this title shall notify the agency responsible for prosecuting the action without delay and shall file a report with the department detailing information on the property seized, the location of the seizure, and any persons arrested.]

[(6)] (5) Property taken or detained under this section is not repleviable but is considered in custody of the law enforcement agency making the seizure subject only to the orders of the court or the official having jurisdiction. When property is seized under this title, the appropriate person or agency may:

(a) place the property under seal;

(b) remove the property to a place designated by it or the warrant under which it was seized; or

(c) take custody of the property and remove it to an appropriate location for disposition in accordance with law.

[(7)] (6) When any property is subject to forfeiture under this section, [a determination for forfeiture to the state shall be made in the following manner:] proceedings shall be instituted in accordance with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code.

[(a) A complaint verified on oath or affirmation shall be prepared by the county attorney or, if within a prosecution district, the district attorney where the property was seized or is to be seized and shall be filed in the district court. The complaint shall describe with reasonable particularity:

(i) the property that is the subject of the proceeding;


(ii) the date and place of seizure, if known; and


(iii) the allegations that constitute a basis for forfeiture.


(b) Upon filing the complaint, the clerk of the district court shall issue a warrant for seizure of the property that is the subject matter of the action without delay and deliver it to the sheriff for service, unless the property has previously been seized.


(c) Notice of the seizure and intended forfeiture shall be filed with the county clerk and served together with a copy of the complaint, at the place where the property was or is about to be seized by conspicuous posting at the premises, and served upon all persons known to the county attorney or, if within a prosecution district, the district attorney to have a claim in the property by one of the following methods:


(i) upon each claimant whose name and address is known at the last-known address of the claimant; or


(ii) upon each owner whose right, title, or interest is of record in the Division of Motor Vehicles, by mailing a copy of the notice and complaint by registered mail to the address given upon the records of the Division of Motor Vehicles; and


(iii) upon all other claimants whose addresses are unknown, but who are believed to have an interest in the property, by one publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the seizure was made.


(d) Except as provided in Subsection (e), any claimant or interested party shall file with the court a verified answer to the complaint within 20 days after service has been obtained.


(e) When property is seized under this title, any interested person or claimant of the property, before being served with a complaint under this section, may file a petition in the district court for release of the person’s interest in the property. The petition shall specify the claimant’s interest in the property and the claimant’s right to have it released. A copy shall be served upon the county attorney or, if within a prosecution district, a district attorney in the county of the seizure, who shall answer the petition within 20 days. Any person petitioning is not required to answer a complaint of forfeiture. If no complaint or petition is filed within 60 days after seizure of the property or after the final disposition of any criminal proceedings involving the property, whichever occurs last, the property shall automatically escheat to the state and shall be delivered to the custody of the appropriate agency for disposition as provided in Subsection (8).


(f) After 20 days following service of a complaint or petition for release, the court shall examine the record, and if no answer is on file, the court shall allow the complainant or petitioner an opportunity to present evidence in support of the claim and order forfeiture or release of the property as the court may determine. If the county attorney or district attorney has not filed an answer to a petition for release and the court determines from the evidence that the petitioner is not entitled to recovery of the property, it shall enter an order directing the county attorney or district attorney to answer the petition within ten days. If no answer is filed within that period, the court shall order the release of the property to the petitioner entitled to receive it.


(g) When an answer to a complaint or petition appears of record at the end of 20 days, the court shall set the matter for hearing within 20 days. At the hearing all interested parties may present evidence of their right of release of the property following the state’s evidence for forfeiture. The court shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence the issues in the case and order forfeiture or release of the property as it determines proper.


(h) Proceedings under this section are independent of any other proceedings, whether civil or criminal, under this title or the laws of this state.


(i) When the court determines that claimants have no right in the property, in whole or in part, it shall declare the property forfeited and direct it delivered to the custody of the department if the property is an alcoholic product or a package used as a container for an alcoholic product, or to the Department of Administrative Services in all other cases. The appropriate department shall dispose of the property as provided in Subsection (8).


(j) When the court determines that property, in whole or in part, is subject to forfeiture, it shall order release of the property to the proper claimant. If the court determines that the property is subject to forfeiture and release in part, it shall order partial release and partial forfeiture. When the property cannot be properly divided for partial forfeiture and release, the court shall order it sold and the proceeds distributed as follows:


(i) first, proportionally among the legitimate claimants;


(ii) second, to defray the costs of the action, including seizure, storage of the property, and costs of sale; and


(iii) third, to the state treasurer for the General Fund.


(k) In any proceeding under this section where forfeiture is declared, in whole or in part, the court shall assess all costs of the forfeiture proceeding, including seizure and storage of the property, against the individual or individuals whose conduct was the basis of the forfeiture, and may assess costs against any other claimant or claimants to the property as the court considers equitable.


(l) Any party to a forfeiture proceeding, including the state, has the right of appeal from any judgment of forfeiture or release as to the whole or any part of the property in issue in the forfeiture proceedings.
]

[(8)] (7) When any property is ordered forfeited under [this title] the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code by a finding of the court that no person is entitled to recover the property:

(a) the property, if an alcoholic product or a package used as a container for an alcoholic product, shall be [deposited in the custody of the department and disposition of the property] disposed of as follows:

(i) If the alcoholic product is unadulterated, pure, and free from crude, unrectified, or impure form of ethylic alcohol, or any other deleterious substance or liquid, and is otherwise in saleable condition, [the department may sell the alcoholic product and any package or container used to contain the alcoholic product, as appropriate, and forward the proceeds to the state treasurer for deposit in the General Fund. The department shall first cover its own costs and then reimburse the appropriate agency or agencies for costs expended in seizing, storing, and obtaining forfeiture of the property] sold in accordance with Section 24-1-16 of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act.

(ii) If the alcoholic product is impure, adulterated, or otherwise unfit for sale, it and its package or container shall be destroyed by the department under competent supervision.

[(b) The property, if other than an alcoholic product, package, or container used to contain the alcoholic product shall be deposited in the custody of the Department of Administrative Services and disposition of the property shall be as follows:

(i) Any state agency, bureau, county, or municipality that demonstrates a need for specific property or classes of property subject to forfeiture may make application for the property to the executive director of the Department of Administrative Services, and shall clearly state in the application its need for the property and the use for which the property is intended.


(ii) The executive director of the Department of Administrative Services shall review all applications for property submitted, make a determination based on necessity and advisability as to final disposition, and notify the designated applicant who may obtain the property upon payment of all costs to that department. That department shall reimburse the appropriate agency or agencies for costs expended in seizing, storing, and obtaining forfeiture of the property.


(iii) If no disposition is made upon an application, the executive director of the Department of Administrative Services shall dispose of the property by public bidding, or if considered appropriate by the executive director, by destruction. Proof of destruction shall be upon oath of two officers or employees of the Department of Administrative Services verified by the executive director of that department or the executive director’s designee.
]
 

Section 19. Section 41-6-13.7 is amended to read:

41-6-13.7. Vehicle subject to forfeiture — Seizure — Procedure.

(1) Any conveyance, including vehicles, aircraft, water craft, or other vessel used in violation of Section 41-6-13.5 shall be subject to forfeiture [and no property right exists in it,] pursuant to the procedures and substantive protections established in the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, Utah Code. [,except that:

(a) a conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in the transaction of business as a common carrier may not be forfeited under this section unless it appears that the owner or other person in charge of the conveyance was a consenting party or privy to violation of this chapter;


(b) a conveyance may not be forfeited under this section by reason of any act or omission committed or omitted without the owner’s knowledge or consent; and


(c) any forfeiture of a conveyance subject to a bona fide security interest is subject to the interest of a secured party who could not have known in the exercise of reasonable diligence that a violation would or did take place in the use of the conveyance.
]

(2) Property subject to forfeiture under this section may be seized by any peace officer of this state upon notice and service of process issued by any court having jurisdiction over the property. However, seizure without notice and service of process may be made when:

(a) the seizure is incident to an arrest under a search warrant or an inspection under an administrative inspection warrant;

(b) the property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding under this section; or

(c) the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the property has been used in violation of the provisions of Section 41-6-13.5.

[(3) In the event of seizure under Subsection (2), proceedings under Subsection (6) shall be instituted without unreasonable delay.]

[(4)] (3) Property taken or detained under this section is not repleviable but is in custody of the law enforcement agency making the seizure, subject only to the orders and decrees of the court or the official having jurisdiction. When property is seized under this section, the appropriate person or agency may:

(a) place the property under seal;

(b) remove the property to a place designated by the warrant under which it was seized; or

(c) take custody of the property and remove it to an appropriate location for disposition in accordance with law.

[(5) When any property is forfeited under this section after a finding of the court that no person is entitled to recover the property, it shall be deposited in the custody of the Division of Surplus Property. The director of the Division of Surplus Property shall dispose of the property by public bidding. The net proceeds of such sale shall be paid to the Department of Public Safety Support Fund for use in training peace officers in pursuit driving and providing a public awareness program regarding police pursuits. Property forfeited under this section may not be applied by the court to costs or fines assessed against any defendant in the case.]

[(6) When any property is subject to forfeiture under this part, a determination for forfeiture to the state shall be made as follows:


(a) A complaint verified on oath or affirmation shall be prepared by the county attorney where the property was seized or is to be seized. The complaint shall be filed in the district court. The complaint shall describe with reasonable particularity:


(i) the property which is the subject matter of the proceeding;


(ii) the date and place of seizure, if known; and


(iii) the allegations which constitute a basis for forfeiture.


(b) Upon filing the complaint, the clerk of the court shall forthwith issue a warrant for seizure of the property which is the subject matter of the action and deliver it to the sheriff for service, unless the property has previously been seized without a warrant under Subsection 41-6-13.7(2).


(c) Notice of the seizure and intended forfeiture shall be filed with the court clerk and served together with a copy of the complaint, upon all persons known to the county attorney to have a claim in the property by one of the following methods:


(i) upon each claimant whose name and address is known, at the last known address of the claimant, or upon each owner whose right, title, or interest is of record in the Division of Motor Vehicles, by mailing a copy of the notice and complaint by certified mail to the address given upon the records of the division, which service is considered complete even though the mail is refused or cannot be forwarded; and


(ii) upon all other claimants whose addresses are unknown, but who are believed to have an interest in the property, by one publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the seizure was made.


(d) Any claimant or interested party shall file with the court a verified answer to the complaint within 20 days after service has been obtained.


(e) When property is seized under this chapter, any interested person or claimant of the property, prior to being served with a complaint under this section, may file a petition in the court having jurisdiction for release of his interest in the property. The petition shall specify the claimant’s interest in the property and his right to have it released. A copy shall be served upon the county attorney in the county of the seizure, who shall answer the petition within 20 days. A petitioner need not answer a complaint of forfeiture.


(f) After 20 days following service of a complaint or petition for release, the court shall examine the record and if no answer is on file, the court shall allow the complainant or petitioner an opportunity to present evidence in support of his claim and order forfeiture or release of the property as the court determines. If the county attorney has not filed an answer to a petition for release and the court determines from the evidence that the petitioner is not entitled to recovery of the property, it shall enter an order directing the county attorney to answer the petition within ten days. If no answer is filed within that period, the court shall order the release of the property to the petitioner entitled to receive it.


(g) When an answer to a complaint or petition appears of record at the end of 20 days, the court shall set the matter for hearing within 20 days. At this hearing, all interested parties may present evidence of their rights of release of the property following the state’s evidence for forfeiture. The court shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence the issues in the case and order forfeiture or release of the property as it determines.


(h) Proceedings of this section are independent of any other proceedings, whether civil or criminal, under this chapter or the laws of this state.


(i) When the court determines that claimants have no right in the property in whole or in part, it shall declare the property to be forfeited and direct it to be delivered to the custody of the Division of Finance. The division shall dispose of the property under Subsection 
(5).

(j) When the court determines that property, in whole or in part, is not subject to forfeiture, it shall order release of the property to the proper claimant. If the court determines that the property is subject to forfeiture and release in part, it shall order partial release and partial forfeiture. When the property cannot be divided for partial forfeiture and release, the court shall order it sold and the proceeds distributed:

(i) first, proportionally among the legitimate claimants;


(ii) second, to defray the costs of the action, including seizure, storage of the property, legal costs of filing and pursuing the forfeiture, and costs of sale; and


(iii) third, to the Division of Finance for the General Fund.


(k) In a proceeding under this section where forfeiture is declared, in whole or in part, the court shall assess all costs of the forfeiture proceeding, including seizure and storage of the property, against the individual or individuals whose conduct was the basis of the forfeiture, and may assess costs against any other claimant or claimants to the property as appropriate.
]


[(7) For purposes of this section, it shall be a rebuttable presumption that the owner of a vehicle was the operator of the vehicle at the time of the offense.
]
 

Section 20. Section 53-10-303 is amended to read:

[53-10-303.Financial Fraud and Money Laundering Forfeiture Account created –Revenue sources — Use of account designated.]

[(1) (a) There is created in the General Fund a restricted account called the “Financial Fraud and Money Laundering Forfeiture Account.”


(b) All monies forfeited or seized to the state through the state or federal court process as a
result of investigations regarding suspicious cash transactions, fraud, and money laundering shall be deposited into this account.]


[(2) The Department of Public Safety may expend amounts as appropriated by theLegislature from this account to aid in enforcement efforts to combat financial criminal activity.
]


[(3) That portion of funds forfeited or seized that are required to be disbursed to othergovernmental entities under existing contractual agreements are exempt from this section.
]


[(4) The Department of Public Safety as part of the annual budget hearings shall providethe Executive Offices, Criminal Justice, and Legislature Appropriations Subcommittee with acomplete accounting of expenditures and revenues from the funds under this section.
]


[(5) The Legislature may annually provide, in the Appropriations Act, legislativedirection for anticipated expenditures of the monies received under this section.
]

Section 21. Section 53A-16-101 is amended to read:

53A-16-101. Uniform School Fund – Sources enumerated. The Uniform School Fund established by Utah Constitution, Article X, Section 5, consists of money received in the state treasury from the following sources:

(1) interest on the State School Fund;

(2) escheats and forfeitures and proceeds from the sale or other disposition of property that may accrue to the state by escheat or forfeiture [except under Section 58-37-13, regarding controlled substances, and Section 41-6-13.7, regarding vehicles involved in police pursuits];

(3) unclaimed shares and proceeds from the sale or other disposition of those shares and unclaimed dividends of any corporation incorporated under Utah law;

(4) all revenues derived from renewable resources on school and state lands, other than those granted for specific purposes;

(5) the proceeds derived from the leasing or renting of school lands and other state lands, including all forfeitures, penalties, and grazing and other fees received in connection with the leases and rentals;

(6) money received from leases or rentals of land acquired by the state through foreclosure of mortgages securing common school fund or through deeds from mortgagors or owners of those lands; and

(7) all other constitutional or legislative allocations to the fund, including revenues received under Utah Constitution, Article XIII, Section 12(3), from taxes on income or intangible property, except for those income tax revenues appropriated to the state’s higher education system.

Section 22. Section 58-37-13 is amended to read:

58-37-13. Property subject to forfeiture — Seizure — Procedure.

(1) As used in this section:

(a) “Claimant” means:

(i) any owner as defined in this section; or

(ii) any interest holder as defined in this section and any other person or entity who asserts a claim to any property seized for forfeiture under this section;

[(a) “Complaint” means a verified civil in rem complaint seeking forfeiture or any criminal information or indictment which contains or is amended to include a demand for forfeiture of a defendant’s in personam interest in any property which is subject to forfeiture.]

(b) “Drug distributing paraphernalia” means any property used or designed to be used in the illegal transportation, storage, shipping, or circulation of a controlled substance. Property is considered “designed to be used” for one or more of the above-listed purposes if the property has been altered or modified to include a feature or device which would actually promote or conceal a violation of this chapter.

(c) “Drug manufacturing equipment or supplies” includes any illegally possessed controlled substance precursor, or any chemical, laboratory equipment, or laboratory supplies possessed with intent to engage in clandestine laboratory operations as defined in Section 58-37d-3.

(d) “Interest holder” means a secured party as defined in Section 70A-9-105(1)(m), a mortgagee, lien creditor, or the beneficiary of a security interest or encumbrance pertaining to an interest in property, whose interest would be perfected against a good faith purchaser for value. A person who holds property for the benefit of or as an agent or nominee for another, or who is not in substantial compliance with any statute requiring an interest in property to be recorded or reflected in public records in order to perfect the interest against a good faith purchaser for value, is not an interest holder.

(e) “Owner” means an individual or entity who possesses a legal or equitable ownership in real or personal property.

[(e)] (f) “Proceeds” means property acquired directly or indirectly from, produced through, realized through, or caused by an act or omission and includes any property of any kind without reduction for expenses incurred in the acquisition, maintenance, or production of that property, or any other purpose.

(g) “Real Property” means:

(i) land; and

(ii) any building, fixture, improvement, appurtenance, structure, or other development that is affixed permanently to land.

[(f)] (h) “Resolution of criminal charges” occurs at the time a claimant who is also charged with violations under Title 58, Chapters 37, 37a, 37b, 37c, or 37d enters a plea, upon return of a jury verdict or court ruling in a criminal trial, or upon dismissal of the criminal charge.

[(h)] (i) “Violation of this chapter” means any conduct prohibited by Title 58, Chapters 37, 37a, 37b, 37c, or 37d or any conduct occurring outside the state which would be a violation of the laws of the place where the conduct occurred and which would be a violation of Title 58, Chapters 37, 37a, 37b, 37c, or 37d if the conduct had occurred in this state.

(2) The following are subject to criminal or civil forfeiture pursuant to the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code [and no property right exists in them]:

(a) all controlled substances which have been manufactured, distributed, dispensed, or acquired in violation of this chapter;

(b) all raw materials, products, and equipment of any kind used, or intended for use, in manufacturing, compounding, processing, delivering, importing, or exporting any controlled substance in violation of this chapter;

(c) all property used or intended for use as a container for property described in Subsections (2)(a) and (2)(b);

(d) all hypodermic needles, syringes, and other paraphernalia, not including capsules used with health food supplements and herbs, used or intended for use to administer controlled substances in violation of this chapter;

(e) all conveyances including aircraft, vehicles, or vessels used or intended [for use] to be used to [transport, or in any manner] facilitate the [transportation, sale, receipt, simple possession, or concealment of ] distribution or possession with intent to distribute the property described in Subsections (2)(a) and (2)(b)[, except that:

(i) a conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in the transaction of business as a common carrier may not be forfeited under this section unless the owner or other person in charge of the conveyance was a consenting party or knew or had reason to know of the violation of this chapter;

(ii) a conveyance may not be forfeited under this section by reason of any act or omission committed or omitted without the owner’s knowledge or consent; and

(iii) any forfeiture of a conveyance is subject to the claim of an interest holder who did not know or have reason to know after the exercise of reasonable that a violation would or did take place in the use of the conveyance];

(f) all books, records, and research, including formulas, microfilm, tapes, and data used or intended for use in violation of this chapter;

(g) everything of value furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for a controlled substance in violation of this chapter, and all moneys, negotiable instruments, and securities used or intended to be used to facilitate any violation of this chapter. An interest in property may not be civilly forfeited under this subsection unless it is proven by [a preponderance of the] clear and convincing evidence that the owner or any interest holder knew of [, had reason to know of, or consented to] the conduct which made the property subject to forfeiture. The burden of presenting this evidence is [shall be] on [upon] the state;

(h) all imitation controlled substances as defined in Section 58-37b-2, Imitation Controlled Substances Act;

(i) (i) all warehousing, housing, and storage facilities, or interest in real property of any kind used, or intended for use, in producing, cultivating, warehousing, storing, distributing [protecting,] or manufacturing any controlled substances in violation of this chapter but only if: [, except that:

(i) any forfeiture of a housing, warehousing or storage facility or interest in real property is subject to the claim of an interest holder who did not know or have reason to know after the exercise of reasonable diligence, that a violation would take place on the property; and

(ii) an interest in property may not be forfeited under this subsection if the owner or any interest holder did not know or have reason to know of the conduct which made the property subject to forfeiture, or did not willingly consent to the conduct;

(iii) unless the premises are used in producing, cultivating, or manufacturing controlled substances, a housing, warehousing, or storage facility or interest in real property may not be forfeited under this subsection unless]

(A) the cumulative sales of controlled substances on the property within a two-month period total or exceed $1,000; or

(B) the street value of any controlled substances found on the premises at any given time totals or exceeds $1,000, but only after the judge makes a specific finding of proportionality under Section 24-1-14, and subject to the condition that even if proportionality is found, the judge shall have discretion not to forfeit real property which is a primary residence.

(ii) A narcotics officer experienced in controlled substances law enforcement may testify to establish the street value of the controlled substances for purposes of this subsection;

(j) any firearm, weapon, or ammunition carried or used [during or in relation to] in connection with a violation of this chapter or any firearm, weapon, or ammunition kept or located within the proximity of controlled substances [or other property subject to forfeiture under this section];

(k) all proceeds traceable to any violation of this chapter. [There is a rebuttable presumption that all money, coins, and currency found in proximity to forfeitable controlled substances, drug manufacturing equipment or supplies, drug distributing paraphernalia, or forfeitable records of importation, manufacture, or distribution of controlled substances are proceeds traceable to a violation of this chapter. The burden of proof is upon the claimant of the property to rebut this presumption.]

(3)[(a)] Property subject to forfeiture under this chapter may be seized by any peace officer of this state upon process issued by any court having jurisdiction over the property. However, seizure without process may be made when:

[(i)] (a) the seizure is incident to an arrest or search under a search warrant or an inspection under an administrative inspection warrant;

(ii) (b) the property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding under this chapter;

(iii) (c) the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the property is directly or indirectly dangerous to health or safety; or

[(iv)] (d) the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the property has been used or intended to be used in violation of this chapter and has probable cause to believe the property will be damaged, intentionally diminished in value, destroyed, concealed, or removed from the state.

[(b) Upon the filing of a complaint, the court shall immediately issue to the seizing agency a warrant for seizure of any property subject to forfeiture which had been seized without a warrant in a manner described in this subsection.]

[(4) In the event of seizure under Subsection (3), forfeiture proceedings under Subsection (9) shall be instituted within 90 days of the seizure. The time period may by extended by the court having jurisdiction over the property upon notice to all claimants and interest holders and for good cause shown.]

[(5)] (4) Property taken or detained under this section is not repleviable but is in custody of the law enforcement agency making the seizure, subject only to the orders and decrees of the court or the official having jurisdiction. When property is seized under this chapter, the appropriate person or agency may:

(a) place the property under seal;

(b) remove the property to a place designated by it or the warrant under which it was seized; or

(c) take custody of the property and remove it to an appropriate location for disposition in accordance with law.

[(6)] (5) All substances listed in Schedule I that are possessed, transferred, distributed, or offered for distribution in violation of this chapter are contraband and no property right shall exist in them. All substances listed in Schedule I which are seized or come into the possession of the state may be retained for any evidentiary or investigative purpose, including sampling or other preservation prior to disposal or destruction by the state.

[(7)] (6) All marijuana or any species of plants from which controlled substances in Schedules I and II are derived which have been planted or cultivated in violation of this chapter, or of which the owners or cultivators are unknown, or are wild growths, may be seized and retained for any evidentiary or investigative purpose, including sampling or other preservation prior to disposal or destruction by the state. Failure, upon demand by the department or its authorized agent, of any person in occupancy or in control of land or premises upon which species of plants are growing or being stored, to produce an appropriate license or proof that he is the holder of a license, is authority for the seizure and forfeiture of the plants.

[(8) When any property is forfeited under this chapter by a finding of the court that no person is entitled to recover the property, it shall be deposited in the custody of the Division of Finance. Disposition of all property is as follows:

(a) The state may include in its complaint seeking forfeiture, a request that the seizing agency be awarded the property. Upon a finding that the seizing agency is able to use the forfeited property in the enforcement of controlled substances laws, the court having jurisdiction over the case shall award the property to the seizing agency. Each agency shall use the forfeited property for controlled substance law enforcement purposes only. Forfeited property or proceeds from the sale of forfeited property may not be used to pay any cash incentive, award, or bonus to any peace officer or individual acting as an agent for the agency, nor may it be used to supplant any ordinary operating expense of the agency. The seizing agency shall pay to the prosecuting agency the legal costs incurred in filing and pursuing the forfeiture action. Property forfeited under this section may not be applied by the court to costs or fines assessed against any defendant in the case.

(b) The seizing agency, or if it makes no application, any state agency, bureau, county, or municipality, which demonstrates a need for specific property or classes of property subject to forfeiture shall be given the property for use in enforcement of controlled substances laws upon the payment of costs to the county attorney or, if within a prosecution district, the district attorney for legal costs for filing and pursuing the forfeiture and upon application for the property to the director of the Division of Finance. The application shall clearly set forth the need for the property and the use to which the property will be put.

(c) The director of the Division of Finance shall review all applications for property submitted under Subsection (8)(b) and, if the seizing agency makes no application, make a determination based on necessity and advisability as to final disposition and shall notify the designated applicant or seizing agency, where no application is made, who may obtain the property upon payment of all costs to the appropriate department. The Division of Finance shall in turn reimburse the prosecuting agency or agencies for costs of filing and pursuing the forfeiture action, not to exceed the amount of the net proceeds received for the sale of the property. Any proceeds remaining after payment shall be returned to the seizing agency or agencies.

(d) If no disposition is made upon an application under Subsection (8)(a) or (b), the director of the Division of Finance shall dispose of the property by publicbidding or as considered appropriate, by destruction. Proof of destruction shall be upon oath of two officers or employees of the department having charge of the property, and verified by the director of the department or his designated agent.]

(7) Forfeiture proceedings shall [be commenced as follows:] conform with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code.

[(a) For actions brought under Subsections (2)(a) through (2)(j), a complaint shall be prepared by the county attorney, or if within a prosecution district, the district attorney, or the attorney general, and filed in a court of record where the property was seized or is to be seized. In cases in which the claimant of the property is also charged as a criminal defendant, the complaint shall be filed in the county where the criminal charges arose, regardless of the location of the property. The complaint shall include:

(i) a description of the property which is subject to forfeiture;

(ii) the date and place of seizure, if known; and

(iii) the allegations of conduct which gives rise to forfeiture.

(b) In cases where a claimant is also charged as a criminal defendant, the forfeiture shall proceed as part of the criminal prosecution as an in personam action against the defendant’s interest in the property subject to forfeiture. A defendant need not file a written answer to the complaint, but may acknowledge or deny interest in the property at the time of first appearance on the criminal charges. If a criminal information or indictment is amended to include a demand for forfeiture, the defendant may respond to the demand at the time of the amendment.

(i) Unless motion for disposition is made by the defendant, the determination of forfeiture shall be stayed until resolution of the criminal charges. Hearing on the forfeiture shall be before the court without a jury. The court may consider any evidence presented in the criminal case, and receive any other evidence offered by the state or the defendant. The court shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence the issues in the case and order forfeiture or release of the property as it determines.

(ii) A defendant may move the court to transfer the forfeiture action, to stay all action, including discovery, in the forfeiture, or for hearing on the forfeiture any time prior to trial of the criminal charges. Either party may move the court to enter a finding of forfeiture as to defendant’s interest in part or all of the property, either by default or by stipulation. Upon entry of a finding, the court shall stay the entry of judgment until resolution of the criminal charges. Any finding of forfeiture entered by the court prior to resolution of the criminal charges may not constitute a separate judgment, and any motion for disposition, stay, severance, or transfer of the forfeiture action may not create a separate proceeding. Upon the granting of a motion by the defendant for disposition, stay, severance, or transfer of the forfeiture action, the defendant shall be considered to have waived any claim that the defendant has been twice put in jeopardy for the same offense.

(iii) Any other person claiming an interest in property subject to forfeiture under this subsection may not intervene in a trial or appeal of a complaint filed under this subsection. Following the entry of an in personam forfeiture order, or upon the filing of a petition for release under Subsection (e), the county attorney, district attorney, or attorney general may proceed with a separate in rem action to resolve any other claims upon the property subject to forfeiture.

(c) A complaint seeking forfeiture under Subsection (2)(k) shall be prepared by the county attorney, or if within a prosecution district, the district attorney, or by the attorney general, either in personam as part of a criminal prosecution, or in a separate civil in rem action against the property alleged to be proceeds, and filed in the county where the property is seized or encumbered, if the proceeds are located outside the state. A finding that property is the proceeds of a violation of this chapter does not require proof that the property is the proceeds of any particular exchange or transaction. Proof that property is proceeds may be shown by evidence which establishes all of the following by a preponderance of the evidence:

(i) that the person has engaged in conduct in violation of this chapter;

(ii) that the property was acquired by the person during that period when the conduct in violation of this chapter occurred or within a reasonable time after that period; and

(iii) that there was no likely source for the property other than conduct in violation of the chapter.

(d) Notice of the seizure and intended forfeiture shall be filed with the clerk of the court, and served upon all persons known to the county attorney or district attorney to have a claim in the property by:

(i) personal service upon a claimant who is charged in a criminal information or indictment; and

(ii) certified mail to each claimant whose name and address is known or to each owner whose right, title, or interest is of record in the Division of Motor Vehiclesto the address given upon the records of the division, which service is consideredcomplete even though the mail is refused or cannot be forwarded. The countyattorney, district attorney, or attorney general shall make one publication in anewspaper of general circulation in the county where the seizure was made for all other claimants whose addresses are unknown, but who are believed to have aninterest in the property.

(e) Except under Subsection (9)(a) in personam actions, any claimant or interest holder shall file with the court a verified answer to the complaint within 20 days after service. When property is seized under this chapter, any interest holder or claimant of the property, prior to being served with a complaint under this section, may file a petition in the court having jurisdiction for release of his interest in the property. The petition shall specify the claimant’s interest in the property and his right to have it released. A copy shall be served upon the county attorney or, if within a prosecution district, the district attorney in the county of the seizure, who shall answer the petition within 20 days. A petitioner need not answer a complaint of forfeiture.

(f) For civil actions in rem, after 20 days following service of a complaint or petition for release, the court shall examine the record and if no answer is on file, the court shall allow the complainant or petitioner an opportunity to present evidence in support of his claim and order forfeiture or release of the property as the court determines. If the county attorney or district attorney has not filed an answer to a petition for release and the court determines from the evidence that the petitioner is not entitled to recovery of the property, it shall enter an order directing the county attorney or district attorney to answer the petition within ten days. If no answer is filed within that period, the court shall order the release of the property to the petitioner entitled to receive it.

(g) When an answer to a complaint or petition appears of record at the end of 20 days, the court shall set the matter for hearing. At this hearing all interested parties may present evidence of their rights of release of the property following the state’s evidence for forfeiture. The court shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence the issues in the case and order forfeiture or release of the property as it determines.

(h) When the court determines that claimants have no right in the property in whole or in part, it shall declare the property to be forfeited.

(i) When the court determines that property, in whole or in part, is not subject to forfeiture, it shall order release of the property to the proper claimant. If the court determines that the property is subject to forfeiture and release in part, it shall order partial release and partial forfeiture. When the property cannot be divided for partial forfeiture and release, the court shall order it sold and the proceeds distributed:

(i) first, proportionally among the legitimate claimants;

(ii) second, to defray the costs of the action, including seizure, storage of the property, legal costs of filing and pursuing the forfeiture, and costs of sale; and

(iii) third, to the Division of Finance for the General Fund.

(j) In a proceeding under this section where forfeiture is declared, in whole or in part, the court shall assess all costs of the forfeiture proceeding, including seizure and storage of the property, against the individual or individuals whose conduct was the basis of the forfeiture, and may assess costs against any other claimant or claimants to the property as appropriate.]

Section 23. Section 58-37-20 is amended to read:

[58-37-20. Drug Forfeiture Account created – Revenue sources – Use of account designated.]

[(1) (a) There is created in the General Fund a restricted account called the “Drug Forfeiture Account.”

(b) All monies forfeited or seized to the state through the state or federal court process as a result of activity involving a controlled substance violation as provided under Title 58, Chapter 37, 37a, 37b, 37c, or 37d, or prohibited under federal law shall be deposited into the Drug Forfeiture Account.]

[(2) The Department of Public Safety may expend amounts as appropriated by the Legislature from the Drug Forfeiture Account to aid in enforcement efforts to combat drug trafficking.]

[(3) That portion of funds forfeited or seized that are required to be disbursed to other governmental entities under existing contractual agreements are exempt from this section.]

[(4) Funds forfeited or seized as a result of the Salt Lake Airport Drug Program, not to exceed the Department of Public Safety’s expenditure to that program, are exempt from this section.]

[(5) The Department of Public Safety as part of the annual budget hearings shall provide the Executive Offices, Criminal Justice, and Legislature Appropriations Subcommittee with a complete accounting of expenditures and revenues from the funds under this section.]

[(6) The Legislature may annually provide, in the Appropriations Act, legislative direction for anticipated expenditures of the monies received under this section.]

Section 24. Section 58-37a-6 is amended to read:

58-37a-6. Seizure — Forfeiture — Property rights. Drug paraphernalia is subject to seizure and forfeiture in accordance with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, of the Utah Code.

Section 25. Section 58-37c-15 is amended to read:

58-37c-15. Civil Forfeiture. The following shall be subject to forfeiture [to the state under the procedures of Section 58-37-13 and no property right shall exist in them] in accordance with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code:

(1) all listed controlled substance precursor chemicals regulated under the provisions of this chapter which have been distributed, possessed, or are intended to be distributed or otherwise transferred in violation of any felony provision of this chapter; and

(2) all property used by any person to facilitate, aid, or otherwise cause the unlawful distribution, transfer, possession, or intent to distribute, transfer, or possess a listed controlled substance precursor chemical in violation of any felony provision of this chapter.
Section 26. Section 58-37d-7 is amended to read:

58-37d-7. Seizure and forfeiture. Chemicals, equipment, supplies, vehicles, aircraft, vessels, and personal and real property used in furtherance of a clandestine laboratory operation are subject to seizure and forfeiture under the procedures [of Section 58-37-13.] and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1 of the Utah Code.

Section 27. Section 59-14-207 is amended to read:

59-14-207. Unstamped cigarettes — Contraband goods — Seizure — Public auction — Proceeds of sale.

(1) Any cigarettes found in this state which have been within the state for 72 hours or longer in the possession of any wholesaler, distributor, or retailer or have been sold by that wholesaler, distributor, or retailer not having affixed to the package or container the stamps required by this chapter, are contraband goods and may be seized without a warrant by the commission, its employees, or by any peace officer of the state or its political subdivisions.

(2) The seized goods shall be delivered to the commission [for sale at public auction to the highest bidder after due advertisement. Before delivering the goods,] and the commission shall [require the person receiving the goods to] affix the proper amount of stamps to the individual packages or containers, prior to instituting forfeiture proceedings under the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1 of the Utah Code.

[(3) The proceeds of any goods sold as provided under Subsection (2), after paying the costs of confiscation and sale, shall be turned over to the state treasurer to the credit of the state General Fund.]

Section 28. Section 63-30-7 is amended to read:

63-30-7. Waiver of immunity for negligent damage, destruction or loss of seized property.

Immunity from suit of all governmental entities is waived as to any claim based on thenegligent destruction, damage or loss of goods, merchandise or other property while in the possession of any officer or agency of state or local government, including law enforcement officers, if the property was seized for the purpose of forfeiture under any provision of state law.

Section 29. Section 76-3-501 is amended to read:

76-3-501. Vehicle subject to forfeiture — Seizure — Procedure.

(1) Any vehicle used in the commission of, attempt to commit, or flight after commission of any felony in which a firearm or other dangerous weapon as defined in Section 76-10-501, or explosive, chemical, or incendiary device or parts as defined in Section 76-10-306 is used, or any vehicle used in the commission of the illegal possession or sale of a firearm in or from the vehicle, is subject to forfeiture. [and no property right exists in it if the owner of the vehicle was a knowing participant in the offense or voluntarily allowed the vehicle to be used, knowing that it would probably be used to commit the offense.

(2) Any forfeiture of a vehicle subject to a bona fide security interest is subject to the interest of a secured party who could not have known in the exercise of reasonable diligence that a violation would or did take place in the use of the vehicle
.]

[(3)] (2) Vehicles subject to forfeiture under this section may be seized by any peace officer of this state upon process issued by any court having jurisdiction over the vehicle. However, seizure without process may be made when:

(a) the seizure is incident to a lawful arrest, with or without an arrest warrant;

(b) the vehicle is seized incident to a lawful search with or without a search warrant or an inspection under an administrative inspection warrant;

(c) the vehicle subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding; or

(d) the peace officer seizing the vehicle has probable cause to believe that the vehicle has been used or is intended to be used in violation of this section and the peace officer reasonably believes that the vehicle will be lost, damaged, or used in further violation of law if the officer delays seizure to obtain a warrant.

[(4)] (3) In the event of seizure under Subsection (3),] Forfeiture proceedings under this section [Subsection (5)] shall be instituted promptly in accordance with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code.

[(5)] (4) Any vehicle taken or detained under this section is not repleviable but is in custody of the law enforcement agency making the seizure, subject only to the orders and decrees of the court or the official having jurisdiction. When a vehicle is seized under this chapter the appropriate person or agency may:

(a) remove the vehicle to a place designated by the court, official, or the warrant under which the vehicle was seized; or

(b) take custody of the vehicle and remove it to an appropriate location for disposition in accordance with law.

[(6) When any vehicle is subject to forfeiture, determination for forfeiture to the state shall be made as follows:

(a) A complaint verified on oath or affirmation shall be prepared by the county
attorney, or if within a prosecution district the district attorney, where the vehiclewas seized or is to be seized. The complaint shall be filed in the district court where the vehicle was seized. The complaint shall describe with reasonable particularity the:

(i) vehicle which is the subject matter of the proceeding;

(ii) date and place of seizure, if known; and


(iii) allegations which constitute the basis for forfeiture.


(b) Upon filing the complaint, the clerk of the court shall forthwith issue a warrant
for the seizure of the vehicle which is the subject matter of the action and deliver it to the sheriff for service upon the seizing person or agency.


(c) Notice of the seizure and intended forfeiture shall be filed with the county clerk, and served together with a copy of the complaint, upon all persons known
to the county attorney or district attorney to have a claim in the vehicle by one of the following methods:


(i) upon each claimant whose name and address is known, at the last
known address of the claimant, or upon each owner whose right, title, or interest is of record in the Division of Motor Vehicles, by mailing a copy of the notice and complaint by certified mail to the address given upon therecords of the division, which service is considered complete even thoughthe mail is refused or cannot be forwarded; and


(ii) upon all other claimants whose addresses are unknown, but who are
believed to have an interest in the vehicle, by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the seizure was made.


(d) Any claimant or interested party shall file with the court a verified answer to the complaint within 20 days after service has been obtained.

(e) When a vehicle is seized under this section, any interested person or claimant of thevehicle, prior to being served with a complaint under this section, may file a petition in the court having jurisdiction for release of his interest in the vehicle. The petition shall specify the claimant’s interest in the vehicle and his right to have it released. A copy shallbe served upon the county attorney or, if within a prosecution district the district attorney,in the county of the seizure, who shall answer the petition within 20 days. A petitionerunder this subsection need not answer a complaint of forfeiture.

(f) After 20 days following service of a complaint or petition for release, the court shallexamine the record and if no answer is on file, the court shall allow the complainant orpetitioner an opportunity to present evidence in support of his claim and order forfeitureor release of the vehicle as the court determines. If the county attorney or district attorney
has not filed an answer to a petition for release and the court determines from the evidence that the petitioner is not entitled to recovery of the vehicle, it shall enter an order directing the county attorney or district attorney to answer the petition within ten days. If no answer is filed within that period, the court shall order the release of the vehicle to the petitioner entitled to receive it.


(g) When an answer to a complaint or petition appears of record at the end of 20 days, the court shall promptly set the matter for hearing. At this hearing all interested parties may present evidence of their rights of release of the vehicle following the state’s evidence for forfeiture. The court shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence the issues in the case and order forfeiture or release of the vehicle as it determines.


(h) Proceedings of this section are independent of any other proceedings, whether civil or criminal, under the laws of this state.


(i) When the court determines that claimants have no right in the vehicle in whole or in part, it shall declare the vehicle to be forfeited and direct it to be delivered for disposition in accordance with Subsection (7).


(j) When the court determines that the vehicle, in whole or in part, is not subject to forfeiture, it shall order release of the vehicle to the proper claimant. If the court determines that the vehicle is subject to forfeiture in part and release in part, it shall order partial release and partial forfeiture. When the vehicle cannot be divided for partial forfeiture and release, the court shall order it sold and the proceeds distributed:


(i) first, proportionally among the legitimate claimants;


(ii) second, to defray the costs of the action, including seizure, storage of the vehicle, legal costs of filing and pursuing the forfeiture, and costs of sale; and


(iii) third, in accordance with Subsection (7).


(k) In a proceeding under this section where forfeiture is declared, in whole or in part, thecourt shall assess all costs of the forfeiture proceeding, including seizure and storage of the vehicle, against the individual or individuals whose conduct was the basis of the forfeiture, and may assess costs against any other claimant or claimants to the vehicle as appropriate.
]

[(7) When any vehicle is forfeited under this section by a finding of the court that no person is entitled to recover it or that the vehicle is subject to forfeiture in part and release in part to a claimant, a court shall order that the vehicle be delivered to the seizing agency for sale as the court directs. The court shall also order that the proceeds from the sale of the vehicle be distributed in accordance with the provisions of Subsection (6)(j).]

[(8) When the court orders that a vehicle be forfeited, in whole or in part, under this section, it shall direct that the proceeds from the sale of the forfeited vehicle, or part thereof, be divided or distributed as follows:

(a) 3/4 to the agency making the seizure; and

(b) 1/4 to the state treasurer for deposit into the General Fund.


(9) If the vehicle is found by the court not to be subject to forfeiture, it shall be released to the owner.
]

Section 30. Section 76-10-1107 is amended to read:

76-10-1107. Seizure and sale of devices or equipment used for gambling.

(1) Whenever any magistrate shall determine that any devices or equipment is used or kept for the purpose of being used for gambling, the magistrate may authorize the county commissioner of the county wherein the seizure occurred, in conjunction with the sheriff, or if the seizure occurred within the limits of an incorporated city or town, may authorize its governing body, in conjunction with its chief law enforcement officer, to seize the devices [and sell them for the best price obtainable] or equipment and institute forfeiture proceedings in accordance with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code. [The sale must be made to a person of good character and repute who is a bona fide resident of a state where it is lawful to use the equipment. The officials conducting the sale shall place the equipment on a public carrier, properly consigned to the purchaser at the place of his residence.]

(2) The proceeds of any sale shall be paid [ into the treasury, for welfare purposes only, of the county or political unit conducting the sale] to the Uniform School Fund, Title 53A, Chapter 16, Section 101 of the Utah Code.

[(3) If no sale is consummated within ninety days of the authorization 
therefor, the devices or equipment shall be destroyed under the direction of the magistrate.
]

Section 31. Section 76-10-1108 is amended to read:

76-10-1108. Seizure and disposition of gambling debts or proceeds.

(1) [At the commencement of any prosecution for a violation of this part, any] Any gambling bets or gambling proceeds which are reasonably identifiable as having been used or obtained in violation of this part may be seized [ and they shall be held pending the disposition of the proceedings. At the conclusion of the proceedings, any person who is found guilty of a violation of this part shall forfeit any sums held by the court which were acquired or being used in violation of this part] for forfeiture pursuant to the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1 of the Utah Code. [Any sums not identifiable, or in the event the individual is found not guilty, the sums shall be returned to him.]

[(2) A commencement of prosecution shall occur upon arrest, issuance of a complaint, or indictment, which ever occurs first.]

[(3)](2) All sums forfeited under this section shall be paid [into the treasury of the county or political unit conducting the prosecution.] to the Uniform School Fund, Title 53A, Chapter 16, Section 101 of the Utah Code.

SSection 32. Section 76-10-1603.5 is amended to read:

76-10-1603.5. Violation a felony — Costs — Forfeiture — Fines — Divestiture — Restrictions — Dissolution or reorganization — Restraining orders and injunctions — Hearings — Special verdict — Findings — Judgment and order of forfeiture — Seizure of property — Sale — Proceeds — Petitions for remission or mitigation of forfeiture — Hearing — Disposition.

(1) A person who violates any provision of Section 76-10-1603 is guilty of a second degree felony. In addition to penalties prescribed by law, the court may order the person found guilty of the felony to pay to the state, if the attorney general brought the action, or to the county, if the county attorney or district attorney brought the action, the costs of investigating and prosecuting the offense and the costs of securing the forfeitures provided for in this section. The person shall forfeit to the [state or the county] Uniform School Fund, Title 53A, Chapter 16, Section 101, of the Utah Code:

(a) any interest acquired or maintained in violation of any provision of Section 76-10-1603;

(b) any interest in, security of, claim against, or property or contractual right of any kind affording a source of influence over any enterprise which the person has established, operated, controlled, conducted, or participated in the conduct of in violation of Section 76-10-1603; and

(c) any property constituting or derived from [any] the net proceeds which the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from the conduct constituting the pattern of unlawful activity or from any act or conduct constituting the pattern of unlawful activity proven as part of the violation of any provision of Section 76-10-1603.

(2) If a violation of Section 76-10-1603 is based on a pattern of unlawful activity consisting of acts or conduct in violation of Section 76-10-1204, 76-10-1205, 76-10-1206, or 76-10-1222, the property subject to forfeiture under this section is limited to property, the seizure or forfeiture of which would not constitute a prior restraint on the exercise of an affected party’s rights under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or Article I, Sec. 15 of the Utah Constitution, or would not otherwise unlawfully interfere with the exercise of those rights.

(3) In lieu of a fine otherwise authorized by law for a violation of Section 76-10-1603, a defendant who derives net [profits or other] proceeds from a conduct prohibited by Section 76-10-1603, may be fined not more than twice the amount of the [gross] net [profits or other] proceeds.

(4) [Except under Subsection (2),] Property subject to criminal forfeiture in accord with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code includes:

(a) real property, including things growing on, affixed to, and found in land; and

(b) tangible and intangible personal property including money, rights, privileges, interests, claims, and securities of any kind;

(c) but does not include property [legitimately] exchanged or to be exchanged for services rendered in connection with [a defendant’s exercise of his rights under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the right to appear and be defended by counsel in criminal prosecutions guaranteed by Article I, Sec. 12 of the Utah Constitution] the defense of the charges or any related criminal case.

(5) Upon conviction for violating any provision of Section 76-10-1603, and in addition to any penalty prescribed by law and in addition to any forfeitures provided for in this section, the court may do any or all of the following:

(a) order the person to divest himself of any interest in or any control, direct or indirect, of any enterprise;

(b) impose reasonable restrictions on the future activities or investments of any person, including prohibiting the person from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise engaged in, to the extent the Utah Constitution and the Constitution of the United States permit; or

(c) order the dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise.

(6) If a violation of Section 76-10-1603 is based on a pattern of unlawful activity consisting of acts or conduct in violation of Section 76-10-1204, 76-10-1205, 76-10-1206, or 76-10-1222, the court may not enter any order that would amount to a prior restraint on the exercise of an affected party’s rights under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or Article I, Sec. 15 of the Utah Constitution.

(7) [(a)] All rights, title, and interest in forfeitable property described in Subsections (1) and (2) vest in the [state if the action was brought by the attorney general or in the county if the action was brought by a county attorney or district attorney,] state treasurer, on behalf of the Uniform School Fund, upon the commission of the act or conduct giving rise to the forfeiture under this section.

(8) For purposes of this section, the “net proceeds” of an offense means property acquired as a result of the violation minus the direct costs of acquiring the property.

[(b) Any forfeitable property that is subsequently transferred to a person other than the defendant may be the subject of a special proceeding and an order that the property be forfeited to the state or the county unless the transferee establishes in a hearing held under Subsection (16) that he is a bona fide purchaser for value of the property who at the time of purchase reasonably believed that the property was not subject to forfeiture under this section.]

[(8)(a) Upon application of the attorney general, the county attorney, or district attorney, the court may enter restraining orders or injunctions, require the execution of satisfactory performance bonds, or take any other action to preserve for forfeiture under this section any forfeitable property described in Subsections (1) and (2)

(i) upon filing of an indictment or an information charging a violation of Section 76-10-1603 and alleging that the property with respect to which the order is sought would, in the event of conviction, be subject to forfeiture under this section; or

(ii) prior to the filing of the indictment or information, if, after notice to persons appearing to have an interest in the property and after affording them an opportunity for a hearing, the court determines that:


(A) there is a substantial probability that the state will prevail on the issue of forfeiture and that failure to enter the order will result in the property being sold, distributed, exhibited, destroyed, or removed from the jurisdiction of the court, or otherwise made unavailable for forfeiture; and


(B) the need to preserve the availability of the property or prevent its sale, distribution, exhibition, destruction, or removal through the entry of the requested order outweighs the hardship on any party against whom the order is to be entered;
].


(iii) an order entered under Subsection (ii) is effective for no more than 90 days, unless extended by the court for good cause shown or unless an indictment or information as described in Subsection (i) has been filed
].


(b) A temporary restraining order may be entered upon application of the attorney general, county attorney, or a district attorney without notice or opportunity for a hearing, when an information or indictment has not yet been filed with respect to the property, if the attorney general, county attorney, or a district attorney demonstrates that there is probable cause to believe that the property with respect to which the order is sought would, in the event of conviction, be subject to forfeiture under this section and that provision of notice would jeopardize the availability of the property for forfeiture or would jeopardize an ongoing criminal investigation. The temporary order expires not more than ten days after it is entered unless extended for good cause shown or unless the party against whom it is entered consents to an extension. A hearing concerning an order entered under this subsection shall be held as soon as possible, and prior to the expiration of the temporary order.


(c) The court is not bound by the Utah Rules of Evidence regarding evidence it may receive and consider at any hearing held under this subsection.
]

[(9) Upon conviction of a person for violating any provision of Section 76-10-1603, the jury, if the case was tried to a jury, shall be instructed and asked to return a special verdict as to whether any of the extent of the property identified in the information or indictment, if any, that is forfeitable under Subsections 76-10-1603.5 (1) and (2).
(b) If the case is tried without a jury, the judge shall make specific written findings if he determines that the property identified in the information or indictment is forfeitable under Subsections 76-10-1603.5 (1) and (2). Whether property is forfeitable shall be proven beyond areasonable doubt.]

[(10)(a) Upon conviction of a person for violating any provision of Section 76-10-1603 and upon the jury’s special verdict or the judge’s finding that the property is forfeitable, the court shall enter a judgment and order of forfeiture of the property to the state or the county and shall authorize the attorney general, the county attorney, or, if within a prosecution district, the district attorney to seize all property ordered forfeited upon the terms stated by the court in its order. Following the entry of an order declaring property forfeited, the court may, upon application of the attorney general, the county attorney, or the district attorney, enter appropriate restraining orders or injunctions, require the execution of satisfactory performance bonds, appoint receivers, conservators, appraisers, accountants, or trustees, or take any other action to protect the interest of the state or county in property ordered forfeited.

(b) Any income accruing to, or derived from, an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise or property which has been ordered forfeited under this section may be used to offset ordinary and necessary expenses to the enterprise which are required by law, or which are necessary to protect the interests of the state or county or third parties.
]

[(11)(a) After seizure of property ordered forfeited under this section, the attorney general, the county attorney, or the district attorney shall direct the disposition of the property by sale or any other commercially feasible means, making provision for the rights of any innocent persons. Any property right or interest not exercisable by or transferable for value to the state or the county, expires and does not revert to the defendant. The defendant or any person acting in concert with or on behalf of the defendant is not eligible to purchase forfeited property at any sale held by the attorney general or the county attorney.

(b) The court may restrain or stay the sale or disposition of the property pending the conclusion of any appeal of the criminal case giving rise to the forfeiture, if the applicant demonstrates that proceeding with the sale or disposition of the property would may result in irreparable injury, harm, or loss to him.


(c) The proceeds of any sale or other disposition of property forfeited under this section and any moneys forfeited may be used first to pay expenses of the forfeiture and the sale, including expenses of seizure, maintenance, and custody of the property pending its disposition, advertising, and court costs.
]

[(12) Regarding property ordered forfeited under this section, the attorney general, the county attorney, or, if within a prosecution district, the district attorney may:

(a) grant petitions for mitigation or remission of forfeiture, restore forfeited property to victims of a violation of this chapter, or take any other action to protect the rights of innocent persons in the interest of justice and as is consistent with the provisions of this section;


(b) compromise claims arising under this section;


(c) award compensation to persons providing information resulting in a forfeiture under this section;


(d) direct the disposition by the state or the county of all property ordered forfeited under this section by public sale or any other commercially feasible means, making provision for the rights of innocent persons;


(e) destroy or otherwise dispose of property determined to be obscene or pornographic; and


(f) take appropriate measures necessary to safeguard and maintain property ordered forfeited under this section pending its disposition.
]

[(13) Except under Subsection (16), a party claiming an interest in property subject to forfeiture under this section:

(a) may not intervene in a trial or appeal of a criminal case involving the forfeiture of property under this section; and


(b) may not commence an action at law or equity against the state or the county concerning the validity of his alleged interests in the property subsequent to the filing of an indictment or an information alleging that the property is subject to forfeiture under this section.
]

[(14) The district court of the state which has jurisdiction of a case under this part may enter orders under this section without regard to location of any property which may be subject to forfeiture under this section, or which has been ordered forfeited under this section.]

[(15) To facilitate the identification or location of property declared forfeited and to facilitate the disposition of petitions for remission or mitigation of forfeiture, after the entry of an order declaring property forfeited to the state or county, the court may, upon application of the attorney general, the county attorney, or the district attorney order that the testimony of any witness relating to the property forfeited be taken by deposition, and that any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material not privileged shall be produced as provided for depositions and discovery under the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure.]

[(16) Following the entry of an order of forfeiture under this section, the attorney general, the county attorney, or the district attorney shall publish notice of the order and of its intent to dispose of the property as the court may direct. The attorney general, the county attorney, or the district attorney may also provide direct written notice to any person known to have an alleged interest in the property subject to the order of forfeiture, as a substitute for published notice as to those persons so notified.

(b) Any person, other than the defendant, asserting a legal interest in property which has been ordered forfeited to the state or to the county under this section may, within 30 days of the final publication of notice or his receipt of notice under Subsection (a), whichever is earlier, petition the court for a hearing to adjudicate the validity of his alleged interest in the property. The hearing is held before the court without a jury.


(c) The petition shall be in writing and signed by the petitioner under penalty of perjury. It shall set forth the nature and extent of the petitioner’s right, title, or interest in the property, the time and circumstances of the petitioner’s acquisition of the right, title, or interest in the property, and any additional facts supporting the petitioner’s claim, and the relief sought.


(d) The hearing on the petition shall, to the extent practicable, be held within 30 days of the filing of the petition. The court may consolidate the hearing on the petition and any petition filed by any other person under this section, other than the defendant.


(e) At the hearing, the petitioner may testify and present evidence and witnesses on his own behalf and cross-examine witnesses who appear at the hearing. The attorney general, county attorney, or district attorney may present evidence and witnesses in rebuttal and in defense of the claim to the property and cross-examine witnesses who appear at the hearing. In addition to testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, the court shall consider the relevant portion of the record of the criminal case which resulted in the order of forfeiture. The court is not bound by the Utah Rules of Evidence at a hearing held under this subsection.


(f) The court shall amend the order of forfeiture in accordance with its determination, if after the hearing the court determines that the petitioner has established by a preponderance of the evidence that:


(i) the petitioner has a legal right, title, or interest in the property, and the right, title, or interest renders the order of forfeiture invalid in whole or in part because the right, title, or interest was vested in the petitioner rather than the defendant or was superior to any right, title, or interest of the defendant at the time of the commission of the acts or conduct which gave rise to the forfeiture of the property under this section; or


(ii) the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser for value of the right, title, or interest in the property and at the time of purchase reasonably believed that the property was not subject to forfeiture under this section.


(g) Following the court’s disposition of all petitions filed under this subsection, or if no petitions are filed following the expiration of the period provided in Subsection (b) for the filing of petitions, the state or the county has clear title to property subject to the order of forfeiture and may warrant good title to any subsequent purchaser or transferee.
]

SSection 33. Section 76-10-1908 is amended to read:

76-10-1908.Forfeiture — Grounds — Procedure — Disposition of property forfeited.

(1) (a) Any of the following property shall be subject to civil or criminal forfeiture [and no property right exists in it]:

[(a)] (i) any conveyance including vehicles, aircraft, watercraft, or other vessel used in violation of Section 76-10-1904; and

[(c)] (ii) any [monetary instruments or funds which are the subject] property which is the net proceeds of a violation of Section 76-10-1903, 76-10-1904, or 76-10-1906.

(b) For purposes of this section, the “net proceeds” of an offense means property acquired as a result of the violation minus the direct costs of acquiring the property.

(2) Property subject to forfeiture under Subsection (1) may be seized by any peace officer of this state upon process issued by any court having jurisdiction over the property. However, seizure without process may be made when:

(a) the seizure is incident to an arrest or search under a search warrant, an inspection under an administrative inspection warrant, under a writ of attachment, or under a writ of garnishment;

(b) the property subject to seizure has been the subject of a prior judgment in favor of the state in a criminal injunction or forfeiture proceeding under this section; or

(c) the peace officer has probable cause to believe that the property has been used in violation of Section 76-10-1903, 76-10-1904, or 76-10-1906.

(3) [In the event of seizure under Subsection (2),] Forfeiture proceedings under this section shall be commenced in accordance with the procedures and substantive protections of the Utah Uniform Forfeiture Procedures Act, Title 24, Chapter 1, of the Utah Code. [under Subsection (4) shall be instituted promptly]

(4) Property taken or detained under this section is not repleviable but is in custody of the law enforcement agency making the seizure, subject only to the orders and decrees of the court or the official having jurisdiction. When property is seized under this chapter, the appropriate person or agency may:

(a) place the property under seal;

(b) remove the property to a place designated by it or the warrant under which it was seized; or

(c) take custody of the property and remove it to an appropriate location for disposition in accordance with law.

[(5) When any property is subject to civil forfeiture, a determination for forfeiture to the state shall be made as follows:

(a) A complaint verified on oath or affirmation shall be prepared by the prosecuting agency where the property was seized or is to be seized. A complaint shall be filed in the district court. The complaint shall describe with reasonable particularity:


(i) the property which is the subject matter of the proceedings;


(ii) the date and place of seizure, if known; and


(iii) the allegations which constitute a basis for forfeiture.


(b) Upon filing the complaint, the clerk of the court shall forthwith issue a warrant for seizure of the property which is the subject matter of the action and deliver it to a peace officer for service, unless the property has previously been seized without a warrant under Subsection (2). If the property was seized under Subsection 

(2), the warrant of seizure shall be delivered to the officer having custody of the property who shall proceed as directed in the warrant.

(c) Notice of the seizure and intended forfeiture shall be filed with the county clerk, and served together with a copy of the complaint, upon all persons known to the prosecuting agency to have a claim in the property by one of the following methods:


(i) upon each claimant whose name and address is known, at the last known address of the claimant, or upon each owner whose right, title, or interest is of record in the Division of Motor Vehicles, by mailing a copy of the notice and complaint by certified mail to the address given upon the records of the division, which service is considered complete even though the mail is refused or cannot be forwarded; and


(ii) upon all other claimants whose addresses are unknown, but who are believed to have an interest in the property, by one publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the seizure was made.


(d) Except under Subsection (5)(e), any claimant or interested party shall file with the court a verified answer to the complaint within 20 days after service has been obtained.


(e) When property is seized under this section, any interested person or claimant of the property, prior to being served with a complaint under this section, may file a petition in the court having jurisdiction for release of his interest in the property. The petition shall specify the claimant’s interest in the property and his right to have it released. A copy shall be served upon the county attorney in the county of the seizure, who shall answer the petition within 20 days. A petitioner need not answer a complaint of forfeiture.


(f) After 20 days following service of a complaint or petition for release, the court shall examine the record and if no answer is on file, the court shall allow the complainant or petitioner an
opportunity to present evidence in support of his claim and order forfeiture or release of the property as the court determines. If a prosecuting agency has not filed an answer to a petition for release and the court determines from the evidence that the petitioner is not entitled to recovery of the property, it shall enter an order directing the prosecuting agency to answer the petition within ten days. If no answer is filed within that period, the court shall order the release of the property to the petitioner entitled to receive it.


(g) When an answer to a complaint or petition appears of record at the end of 20 days, the court shall set the matter for hearing within 20 days. At this hearing all interested parties may present evidence of their rights of release of the property following the state’s evidence for forfeiture. The court shall determine by a preponderance of the evidence the issues in the case and order forfeiture or release of the property as it determines.


(h) When the court determines that claimants have no right in the property in whole or in part, it shall declare the property to be forfeited and direct it to be delivered as provided in Subsection (6).


(i) When the court determines that property, in whole or in part, is not subject to forfeiture, it shall order release of the property to the proper claimant. If the court determines that the property is subject to forfeiture and release in part, it shall order partial release and partial forfeiture. When the property cannot be divided for partial forfeiture and release, the court shall order it sold and the proceeds distributed:


(i) first, to defray the costs of the action, including seizure, storage of the property, legal costs of filing and pursuing the forfeiture, and costs of sale;


(ii) second, proportionally among the legitimate claimants; and


(iii) third, as provided under Subsection (6).
]

[(6) Disposition of all property forfeited under Subsections (1) through (5) by a finding of the court that no person is entitled to recover the property shall be as follows:

(a) Property forfeited under Subsection (1)(a), (b), or (c), if the property is involved in a financial transaction in violation of Section 76-10-1903 or is transported in violation of Section 76-10-1904, may be awarded to the seizing agency upon a petition by the seizing agency of the property in the complaint filed under Subsection (5)(a) and a finding by the court that the seizing agency isable to use the forfeited property in the enforcement of offenses under Title 58 and Title 76, Chapter 10.


(b) If the seizing agency makes no application or the court does not make a finding under Subsection (6)(a) that the seizing agency should be awarded the property, the forfeited property shall be deposited in the custody of the Division of Finance. Any state agency, bureau, county, municipality, or drug strike force which demonstrates a need for specific property or classes of property which has been forfeited shall be given the property for use in enforcement of laws prohibiting specified unlawful activity or in enforcement of this part after payment to the prosecuting agency of legal costs for filing and pursuing the forfeiture and upon the application for the property to the director of the Division of Finance. The application shall clearly set forth the need for the property and the use to which the property will be put.


(c) The director of the Division of Finance shall review all applications for property deposited under Subsection (6)(b) and make a determination based on necessity and advisability as to final disposition and shall notify the designated applicant, who may obtain the property after payment of all costs to the appropriate department. The Division of Finance shall reimburse the prosecuting agency for costs of filing and pursuing the forfeiture action, not to exceed the amount of the net proceeds received from the sale of the property.


(d) If no disposition is made upon an application under Subsection (6)(a), (b), or (c), the Division of Finance shall dispose of the property by public bidding, or, as considered appropriate, by destruction. Proceeds from the sale of the property under this subsection shall be distributed as provided in Subsection (e).


(e) Property forfeited under Subsection (1)(c) for violation of Section 76-10-1906 and proceeds from the sale of the property under Subsection (6)(d) shall be awarded and ordered distributed to the General Fund.
]

[(7) Any person who violates any provision of Section 76-10-1903, 76-10-1904, or 76-10-1906 shall forfeit to the state all property, funds, or monetary instruments involved in the violation or, if unavailable for forfeiture in species, its value whether or not located in this state.]

[(8) Upon conviction for violating any provision of Section 76-10-1903, 76-10-1904, or 76-10-1906, the court may make an order with respect to any property of the defendant, or in which the defendant has an interest, whether or not in this state, to accomplish or further the forfeiture provided under Subsection (7) or the collection of costs under this section.]

[(9) All rights, title, and interest in forfeitable property described in this section vest in the state upon the commission of the act or conduct giving rise to the forfeiture under this section.]

[(10) (a) After forfeiture of property under this section, the court shall direct the disposition of the property by sale or other commercially feasible means, making provision for the rights of any innocent persons. Any property right or interest not exercisable by or transferable for value to the state expires and does not revert to the defendant. The defendant or any person acting in concert with or on behalf of the defendant is not eligible to purchase forfeited property at any sale ordered by the court.

(b) The court may restrain or stay the sale or disposition of the property pending the conclusion of any appeal of the criminal case giving rise to the forfeiture, if the applicant demonstrates that proceeding with the sale or disposition of the property would result in irreparable injury, harm, or loss to him.


(c) The proceeds of any sale or other disposition of property forfeited under this section or any monies forfeited may be used first to pay the expenses of the forfeiture and the sale including expenses of seizure, maintenance, and custody of the property pending its disposition, advertising, and court costs.


(d) Disposition of property forfeited under Subsections (7) through (13) shall be as provided in Subsection (6).


(e) Notwithstanding any provisions of this section to the contrary, the state is obligated to search the lien records applicable to the forfeitable property to determine whether any valid lien against the property has been perfected. As long as the lien holder did not violate the provisions of this section, title to forfeitable property shall be subject to such lien, and the state will either give possession of the property to the lien holder or pay to the lien holder the amount secured by the lien.
]

[(11) In any forfeiture proceeding under Subsections (7) through (13), the prosecutor prosecuting the defendant may:

(a) petition the court for mitigation or remission of forfeiture, for restoration of forfeited property to victims of a violation of this section or to take any other action to protect the rights of innocent persons in the interest of justice and the court may, in its discretion, grant the petition;


(b) compromise claims arising under this section;


(c) award compensation to persons providing information resulting in a forfeiture under this section; or


(d) take appropriate measures necessary to safeguard and maintain property ordered forfeited under this section pending its disposition.
]

[(12) In a proceeding under this section where forfeiture is declared, in whole or in part, the court shall:

(a) determine the costs incurred by the prosecuting agency prosecuting the forfeiture which shall be paid by the recipient of forfeited assets from the proceeds from the assets; and


(b) assess all costs of the forfeiture proceeding including seizure and storage of the property against the individual or individuals whose conduct was the basis for the forfeiture, and may assess costs against any other claimant or claimants to the property as appropriate.
]

[(13) Proceedings under this section are independent of any other proceedings whether civil or criminal under this section or the laws of this state.]

Section 34. Severability.

If any provision of this Act, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder of this Act shall not be affected thereby but shall be given effect without the invalid provision.

Section 35. Effective Date.

If approved by the voters in this state, this initiative shall take effect on March 20, 2001.

 

Categories
Articles

A Guide to Publications

Just Say ‘Wait a Minute’

Malcolm Gladwell
The New York Review of Books

December 17, 19989

A Review of:

The Fix, by Michael Massing 335 pages, $25.00 (hardcover)
published by Simon and Schuster

Drug Crazy: How We Got into This Mess and How We Can Get
Out
, by Mike Gray 251 pages, $23.95 (hardcover) published by
Random House

(See Response: Just Say No: An Exchange)

1.

On a hot, muggy night in the summer of 1976, Ron and Marsha “Keith” Schuchard held a thirteenth-birthday party for their daughter in the backyard of their suburban Atlanta home. The Schuchards were English professors, comfortably middle class, and they worried about their daughter. Her personality had suddenly taken a turn for the worse. She was moody and indifferent and only wanted to hang out with her friends. When she asked for a party, the Schuchards were briefly encouraged, because they thought she was coming out of her shell. But as the night wore on, they grew more and more alarmed.

The “guests”–many of whom they had never seen before–kept to the shadows of the backyard. Cars pulled up in the driveway, with teenagers yelling “Where’s the party?” One girl tried to use the phone but seemed to have difficulty dialing. Looking out on the gathering from their upstairs window, the Schuchards could see little flickers of lights in the corners of the lawn. Finally, when the last of the kids had gone home, the couple went outside in their pajamas and crawled around in the backyard grass with flashlights, trying to figure out what had happened. They found beer cans and empty wine bottles. But what they also found–and what bothered them the most–was marijuana butts and roach clips.

That teenagers occasionally do things–and ingest things–that do not meet the approval of their parents is not, of course, all that unusual. But this particular case was different. In fact, in his new book, The Fix, Michael Massing locates the beginning of what he calls the drug counterrevolution at that moment, late at night, in the suburbs of Atlanta. The Schuchards decided that the reason for their daughter’s disaffection was not normal adolescent angst, nor was it the malt liquor and the wine. It was the marijuana. “We had a sense,” Keith Schuchard would say later, “of something invading our families, of being taken over
by a culture that was very dangerous, very menacing.” The next morning, Schuchard demanded that her daughter give her the names of everyone at the party, and called each parent in turn. She began researching the dangers of marijuana. She fired off a letter to Robert DuPont, the director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse ( NIDA ), and so impressed him when they met that he asked her to write a handbook on parents and drug abuse. She obliged with Parents, Peers, and Pot, a vitriolic attack on the drug culture that claimed pot did everything from causing “enlarged breasts” among adolescent boys to destroying the immune system. It was the biggest best seller in NIDA history, with more than a million copies printed.

By this point, Schuchard had hooked up with a neighbor, Sue Rusche, and formed Families in Action, the country’s first antidrug parents’ group, and was intensively lobbying the president’s drug adviser. By 1980, she and other concerned parents had joined together to form another, still larger antimarijuana group, the National Federation of Parents for Drug-Free Youth ( NFP ), and by January of the following year, with the election of Ronald Reagan, the NFP became one of the
most powerful grass-roots lobbying groups in the land. “The dream we dared to speak of rather timidly three years ago in this auditorium,” Schuchard said at a national drug abuse convention in the spring of 1981, “seems well on its way to realization–that is, the growth of the parents’ movement for drug-free youth from a handful of scattered individuals and groups to an increasingly cohesive, articulate, and powerful national movement.” To Massing, American drug policy has never really recovered from the rise of the likes of Keith Schuchard. In the 1970s, during the Nixon administration, American drug policy had
followed a strict medical model. The focus was on the hard-core user of drugs like heroin, not casual users of “soft” drugs like marijuana. Millions of federal dollars were spent on providing on-demand treatment for heroin users and liberalizing access to methadone. Drug policy was directed by psychiatrists, and users were patients. The parents’ movement turned that policy upside down. Their concern was not with inner-city addicts, but with suburban teenagers, not with heroin but with pot, and not with treatment but with “zero tolerance.” The NFP helped to re-create Nancy Reagan as antidrug crusader. They successfully pushed for the appointment of Carlton Turner as the White House drug
adviser, and Turner represented the antithesis of the old drug policy. As Massing writes:

To start, Turner rejected their idea of distinguishing between hard-core and occasional users. In his view, there was no such thing as “casual” or “recreational” drug use. Nor did he accept the distinction between “hard” and “soft” drugs. To his mind, that was “a very smooth public relations ploy to get the American public to accept all kinds of drugs. It was like soft drinks–you can drink them with impunity if you don’t mind a few cavities.” From now on, Tuner asserted, all types of drugs were to be regarded as equally dangerous, and all types of drug use as equally reprehensible.

In the Reagan years, the budget for treating drug addicts was cut to about a quarter of what it had been just ten years earlier, while billions of dollars were added to the budget for drug reinforcement, overseas interdiction, and prisons. The key outside strategist, pushing the new director, was now another NFP activist, the group’s treasurer, a middle-aged Massachusetts businessman named Otto Moulton. Moulton, Massing writes, was a “giant teddy bear” of a man, with a “round belly, fleshy face, and flock of curly locks,” who was obsessed with the threat
posed to American civilization by marijuana. In his basement he had a huge collection of drug literature and paraphernalia, and he would regularly fire off “Otto Bombs”–letters packed with extensive documentation–to public officials. Moulton, Massing writes, came to “exercise a sort of veto power over what people said and wrote about drugs.” Nancy Reagan’s office would send him materials for approval. Moulton, meanwhile, would try to use his contacts to cut off federal money for drug treatment clinics. The parents hated the government’s emphasis on heroin–which they considered a marginal menace. They hated the idea that addicts might be treated as patients, and they pressured Nancy Reagan into spending her time with schoolchildren and to stop meeting with recovering addicts.

Then, with the election of George Bush, came the appointment of William Bennett as drug czar. He was an English professor and a moralist who knew nothing whatsoever about drugs, which, according to the perverse logic of the counterrevolution, made perfect sense, because the point of the counterrevolution was to take control of the fight against drugs away from the professionals and give it to the parents, and to transform it from a medical crusade into a moral one. In the late 1980s, even as the crack epidemic was first starting to explode in inner cities, Bennett and his drug office remained stubbornly focused
elsewhere. “Our office was created not because of the hard-core user problem, but because of concern about exploding drug use in the suburbs and among young people,” Massing quotes Bruce Carnes, one of Bennett’s top aides, as saying. “It was not directed at hard-core addicts. They consumed the vast bulk of the drugs, and contributed a significant part of the crime, but they weren’t the main threat to your kids becoming drug users.” The drug war was all about “our kids” now.

2.

The Fix is about the consequences of this counterrevolution. It is the story of what was lost when the parents’ movement turned our attention away from treatment and hard drugs. In particular, it is the story of an improbable, all-too-brief golden age in American drug policy, a period of no more than two or three years in the middle of the Nixon administration, when America, in Massing’s eyes, suddenly got it right. His heroes are two young men on Nixon’s staff, Jeff Donfeld and Bud Krogh ( the White House fixer who would later get swept up in the
Watergate scandal ), and Jerome Jaffe, a liberal psychiatrist who in the 1960s pioneered some of the most success-ful drug treatment programs in the country.

Donfeld was one of Nixon’s domestic policy staff, and his portfolio was drugs. He was a “brash conservative” who despised the 1960s counter-culture. But before long he became fascinated with the success of an experimental methadone treatment in Chicago, the Illinois Drug Abuse Program ( IDAP ), which had shown great success in reducing crime, unemployment, and heroin use. Donfeld turned to Krogh, who had been given the responsibility for attacking the crime problem in the District of Columbia, and convinced Krogh that it might be worth trying out the Chicago program in the District. “The District of Columbia
became a laboratory in my mind,” Massing quotes Krogh as saying,

a place where we could put more funding into treatment and see what happened…. The administration’s emphasis had been so overwhelmingly on the law-enforcement side, that I concluded that if we could get a substantial portion of the addict population into some kind of treatment program, where they would have a chance to function and not be driven to commit street crimes, that would be a very important contribution to the law-enforcement side.

The plan worked. Early results from the D.C. pilot project showed stunning drops in criminal activity among those enrolled in treatment. Emboldened, Krogh went to John Ehrlichman, arguing that the program should be instituted nationally, and by the summer of 1971–after a complex round of bureaucratic maneuvering–Nixon called a bipartisan group of congressmen to the White House and announced that he was appointing Jaffe to head “a new, all-out offensive” against drugs, using treatment as its principal weapon. To fund the effort, Nixon more than
doubled the federal money available for treatment programs, to $105 million. By 1973, the total drug budget would reach $420 million, eight times greater than the amount when Nixon had first taken office. Most of that money was put directly into creating drug treatment and methadone replacement programs for heroin users, creating, for the first–and, as it turned out, the last–time in American history, treatment on demand for intravenous drug addicts. “By the spring of 1973,” Massing writes, (excerpt) so many [drug treatment] slots had been created that some cities had excess capacity, and Jaffe, seeking to take advantage, was setting up mechanisms to coax more addicts off the street…. [He] was urging cities to create outreach teams to scour copping zones. To make it easier for addicts to gain access to programs,
Jaffe was issuing contracts to cities to set up IDAP-like central intake units. And, to help get more drug offenders into treatment, he was expanding [his agency’s] Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime program….

The results, at least as reflected in national crime statistics, were impressive. In 1972 crime fell nationally for the first time in 17 years. Crime was down 4.1 percent in Chicago, 4.5 percent in Philadelphia, 8.8 percent in Boston, 15.8 percent in Detroit, and 19 percent in San Francisco. In the District of Columbia, where treatment on demand had been in place longest, crime fell 26.9 percent in 1972. In New York the crime rate fell 18 percent, even though drug arrests and incarceration rates were down sharply that year. The administration that was known for its conservatism and its insistence on law and order had taken the most liberal approach possible to the drug program–and it had worked.
So what happened? Massing gives a number of explanations, but the gist of each is the same: that the drug treatment community never succeeded in explaining its ideas to the general public. Jaffe wanted resources devoted entirely to reducing the demand for drugs, and giving up on the fruitless game of reducing the supply. But that’s a hard sell at the best of times, and as the country drifted steadily rightward in the early 1980s it became all but impossible. Nixon coined the phrase “drug war” in introducing the Jaffe plan.

But later presidents would discover that the true political power in that phrase lay in taking it literally: in fighting drugs at the source with guns and soldiers and helicopters. Jaffe’s approach also involved creating a hierarchy of illicit drugs, in which heroin was at the top of the list and commanded most of the attention and marijuana was at the bottom. But by the end of the 1970s the drug treatment fraternity, through sheer arrogance or laziness or both, had allowed the message that heroin was the most dangerous of drugs and marijuana the least dangerous to be distorted into something even less publicly palatable, namely that heroin was bad and that marijuana was good.

Massing, for example, retells the extraordinary story of how the Carter administration’s drug adviser–Peter Bourne–was forced to resign. In December 1977, Bourne decided to attend a party headed by NORML–the pro-marijuana lobby group headed by Keith Stroup.

If nothing else, Keith Stroup knew how to throw a good party, and the event, held in a posh Dupont Circle townhouse, drew several hundred lawyers, congressional aides, politicians, bureaucrats, and lobbyists, plus assorted marijuana growers and paraphernalia merchants. Waiters carried silver trays bearing caviar and thick joints rolled from the finest grass. Around ten o’clock, a charge went through the crowd: Peter Bourne had arrived.

Mobbed by well-wishers, he was quickly escorted upstairs to a private room where the inner circle was gathered. Among those present were Hunter Thompson, David Kennedy (Robert’s son), and Keith Stroup. A small, bulletlike container of coke was being passed among the people in the room.

Bourne stayed for a short while, then headed back downstairs and left.

When six months later this story emerged–that the White House drug czar had been to a party where cocaine was used–Bourne was forced to resign. Bourne maintained, in his own defense, that he didn’t use the drug at the party. But that was hardly the issue. What was he doing at a NORML party to begin with? Should it surprise anyone that parents like Keith Schuchard–confronting marijuana use in their children for the first time–would read about this in the paper and conclude that federal drug policy didn’t, exactly, reflect their concerns?

There is a more fundamental problem here, though, that goes beyond politics. It wasn’t just that the parents’ movement and the counterrevolution felt that their interests were being slighted by a hard-drug, treatment-based approach, or that the public, in the end, finds interdiction much more satisfying than more passive demand-reduction measures (such as methadone treatment . It was that the parents felt that a treatment-based approach was incompatible with a true war on drugs. For the parents, Massing writes, “the notion of recovery meant that addicts could get well–a message that, they felt, undermined their warning to young people not to use drugs.” Treatment, to the hard-liners, is part of the problem. Massing quotes Carlton Turner: “Under President Reagan, I didn’t believe that our philosophy should be that it’s all right for kids to use marijuana, cocaine, PCP, and Quaaludes, that–‘Hey, that’s all right, go do it, and then when you wake up and become a heroin addict, we’ll put you on methadone.’ That’s not what this country is all about.”

It is hard to overestimate the gulf between these two positions. They are so irreconcilable, so intractable, that they have made it almost impossible to discuss drug policy in this country in an understandable and rational manner. This fall, for example, when President Clinton’s drug czar, General Barry McCaffrey, announced that he wanted to make methadone more widely available, one of the first to attack the plan was New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, who argued that instead of replacing one kind of addiction with another the goal should be to “try to make
America drug free.” This, of course, is a strange position for someone as obsessed with law and order as Giuliani. How does he think the 30,000 addicts in New York currently taking methadone would finance their habits if the government were suddenly to take their free methadone away? By getting jobs at McDonald’s?

But then, Giuliani’s position is hardly stranger than McCaffrey’s previous decision to dramatically escalate the drug war in Mexico. McCaffrey has stated on several occasions that he doesn’t think the United States can do much to stop the flow of drugs across the border, but he has channeled millions of dollars toward hardening the border anyway because, as he told Massing, if smugglers are forced out to sea “there’ll be less murder and corruption of democratic institutions in Mexico and
the United States.” Thus has the drug debate descended into incoherence. We have a drug czar who does not believe in practicing interdiction practicing interdiction and a mayor who prides himself as a crime fighter opposing the one drug strategy that has been proven to fight crime.

3.

One way to appreciate just how far apart these two positions are is to consider a relatively simple question. How much fun are drugs? One of the principal claims of what used to be called the “drug culture” was that drugs are really, really fun, and the parents’ movement has always taken that claim at face value. Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” campaign was about abstinence because the assumption was that, to the overwhelming majority of teenagers, even the smallest initial exposure to pot or cocaine or heroin would prove irresistible. This same assumption is behind the drug counter-revolution’s hostility to treatment. William Bennett, Massing writes, simply didn’t believe that
anyone addicted to drugs would voluntarily decide to try to end their addiction. The addict, as Bennett put it in one of his early speeches, “is a man or woman whose power to exercise such rational volition has already been seriously eroded by drugs, and whose life is instead organized largely–even exclusively–around the pursuit and satisfaction of his addiction.” Bennett would never have used the word “fun,” of course, in connection with drug use, but that’s essentially what he’s implying. Drugs are so appealing that why would anyone want to give them up?

There is something poignant about this attitude. The great unspoken anxiety of those who do not use drugs as adolescents (and I’m assuming Nancy Reagan and William Bennett fall into that category) is that they are missing out on something fabulous, and, of course, it is this very same anxiety that drives those who are using drugs toward even more extravagant claims on their behalf. It is a mutually reinforcing loop, but it has no particular grounding in reality because, of course, drugs really aren’t that much fun–at least not in the way that straitlaced adolescents and anxious parents think that they are. This is a
critical point, but so often overlooked that it is worth examining in more detail.

Earlier this year, for example, a group of researchers at the University of Michigan led by the psychiatrist Ovide Pomerleau published a short report in the journal Addiction. Pomerleau and his colleagues polled four separate groups of people about how they felt when they first experimented with cigarettes: heavy smokers, light smokers, ex-smokers, and never-smokers. What they found is that there are huge differences in how much pleasure people derived from their first few cigarettes. In fact, the amount of pleasure neophyte smokers experienced correlates closely with how heavily they ended up smoking later in life. Of the people who experimented with cigarettes a few times and then never smoked again, only about a quarter got any sort of
pleasant “high” from their first cigarette. Of the ex-smokers–people who smoked for a while but later managed to quit–about a third got a pleasurable buzz. Of people who were light smokers, about half remembered their first cigarette well. Of the heavy smokers, though, 78 percent remembered getting a good buzz from their first few puffs. How much people smoke depends, in other words, an awful lot on how much they like smoking.

Put that way, the conclusion of the study sounds really obvious and almost silly. But it’s an important point. We often assume that the reason most teens don’t take up smoking is that we have successfully armed them against the powerful lure of nicotine: convinced them that it is a dangerous and filthy habit, made cigarettes hard for minors to buy, made it impossible to smoke inside buildings or in restaurants. What Pomerleau is suggesting is that for an awful lot of us–not all of us, of course, but many of us–cigarettes don’t present a powerful lure at all. We don’t start smoking because smoking makes us feel sick.

This is true, in some sense, for nearly all addictive drugs. In the 1996 Household Survey on Drug Abuse, 1.1 percent of those polled said that they had used heroin at least once. But only 18 percent of those had used it in the past year, and only 9 percent had used it in the past month. That is not the profile of a universally likable drug. The figures for cocaine are even more striking. Of those who have ever tried cocaine, less than 1 percent–0.9 percent–are regular users. Some of that other 99.1 percent are, no doubt, recovered addicts, people who painfully reclaimed their lives from the grip of the drug. But an awful lot
of them are people who snorted once or twice and were left either ambivalent or nauseated. Even a drug as mild as pot evokes as many negative reactions as positive:some people find it delightful. Lots of others complain it makes them paranoid or simply puts them to sleep.

The only drug that gets consistently high marks is Ecstasy. Ecstasy is wonderful. It makes you love everyone without reservation. But that’s also why the appeal of Ecstasy is necessarily limited. Who really wants to love everyone without reservation? The first–and only–time Iused cocaine was at a New Year’s Eve party in Toronto, in the late 1980s. Someone pulled me into a back room and offered me a line. I snorted half of it, and waited for my world to explode. When it didn’t, I snorted the second half, and for my pains all I got was an itchy nose and a bad headache.

This is not to say that no one likes drugs. Of course, some people do. It’s just that what is most striking about almost all drugs is how extraordinarily selective their appeal is. 99.1 percent of cocaine experimenters don’t go on to become users. We, as a society, take that as evidence of something intrinsically problematic with cocaine. But doesn’t it really suggest that there is something intrinsically problematic with those 0.9 percent who become regular users? This is really the issue at the heart of the great, irreconcilable difference between the Jaffe camp and the parents’ camp. It isn’t just that the parents think that drugs are fun–when they are not–it’s that parents think the problem is about drugs, when it is really about users.

This same mistake is made by those who take the libertarian position on drugs, and who believe that most of the problems associated with drugs are the result of the fact that they are illegal. In his new book Drug Crazy, Mike Gray paints a lively and quite convincing portrait of all the corruption and futility of drug prohibition. He makes a devastating argument against interdiction, for example, pointing out that all of the heroin consumed in the United States every year can fit inside a single
steel can go container. (To put that in perspective, in a typical month the port of Los Angeles alone processes about 130,000 cargo containers from incoming ships, of which customs inspectors have the time and resources to inspect only about 400.) These are fine arguments. But when Gray starts to actually talk about the people who use these drugs, he–like so many on the exact opposite end of the spectrum–starts to lose his way.

Gray tells the story, for instance, of Dr. William Stewart Halsted, one of the founders of the Johns Hopkins Hospital. Halsted was a world-famous surgeon, renowned for his skill and ingenuity, a happily married man with an “exemplary” private life. He was also, unbeknownst to almost everyone, a morphine addict for all of his adult life, and despite years of trying, was never able to cut his addiction to less than 180 milligrams of morphine a day. Halsted’s story, Gray writes,

is revealing not only because it shows that a morphine addict on the proper maintenance dose can be productive. It also illustrates the incredible power of the drug in question. Here was a man with almost unlimited resources–moral, physical, financial, medical–who tried everything he could think of to quit, and he was hooked until the day he died.

The first of these three sentences is undoubtedly true. Halsted was taking morphine to break his previous addiction to cocaine, the same way that addicts today take methadone to break their addiction to heroin, and these kinds of maintenance regimens can, under ideal circumstances, permit addicts to lead normal lives. That was part of the logic behind the Jaffe model. The second sentence, however, is simply wrong. Halsted’s addiction tells you nothing whatever about the incredible power of the drug in question, because there are plenty of people who are able to quit cocaine without the need of additional drugs, and plenty more who would have found it possible to break a morphine habit. All Halsted’s addiction tells you is something about
Halsted: that he was one of those people–like the 0.9 percent of cocaine experimenters who take up the drug regularly, or the handful in Pomerleau’s study who took their first puffs and liked it–who have some kind of intrinsic affinity for addictive drugs. We don’t really know, of course, what precisely this intrinsic affinity is. Some of it is probably genetic. There are also probably certain environmental effects that can powerfully reinforce these addictive tendencies. The point is simply that
addiction is not a universal response to drugs.

Massing brackets his discussion of the politics of the drug war with a detailed and fascinating profile of a drug treatment referral center in Harlem. He follows, in particular, a woman named Yvonne Hamilton, charting, over the course of several years, her ultimately successful battle against cocaine addiction. Two of Yvonne’s siblings, Massing tells us, turned out well: one was a pastor in Queens and another a high school teacher. But Yvonne was in trouble from the beginning. She was sampling her mother’s tranquilizers and bottles of liquor while barely into her teens. In junior high, she began smoking pot. In high school, she took LSD, and then after school, while working, she developed
a drinking problem. When, in 1985, she first freebased cocaine, her life changed forever. “At once,” Massing writes, “she felt a burst of pleasure go off in her brain. It quickly surged down her body, tingling her skin, roiling her stomach, grabbing her groin. ‘I’ll do this drug until the day I die,’ she told herself.”

Yvonne Hamilton is different from most of us: different from her family, and different from most people in East Harlem, for whom the abundantly available drugs on the street there hold no particular appeal. What the parents do not understand is that the key to the drug war is not about broadcasting antidrug messages, or teaching kids how to say no, or crawling around your backyard looking for roach clips. It is, as Massing argues persuasively, about understanding precisely what makes people like Yvonne Hamilton different, and giving her the kind of help and attention her difference demands.

 

Categories
Articles

A Guide to Drug-Related State Ballot Initiatives

Full Text
back to summary

California Proposition 36

SECTION 2. Findings and Declarations

SECTION 3. Purpose and Intent

SECTION 4. Section 1210 is added to the Penal Code

SECTION 5. Section 1210.1 is added to the Penal Code

SECTION 6. Section 3063.1 is added to the Penal Code

SECTION 7. Division 10.8 is added to the Health & Safety Code

SECTION 8. Effective Date

SECTION 9. Amendment

SECTION 10. Severability

SECTION 1. Title

This Act shall be known and may be cited as the “Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000.”

SECTION 2. Findings and Declarations

The People of the State of California hereby find and declare all of the following:

    (a) Substance abuse treatment is a proven public safety and health measure. Non-violent, drug dependent criminal offenders who receive drug treatment are much less likely to abuse drugs and commit future crimes, and are likelier to live healthier, more stable and more productive lives.

    (b) Community safety and health are promoted, and taxpayer dollars are saved, when nonviolent persons convicted of drug possession or drug use are provided appropriate community-based treatment instead of incarceration.

    (c) In 1996, Arizona voters by a 2-1 margin passed the Drug Medicalization, Prevention, and Control Act which diverted non-violent drug offenders into drug treatment and education services rather than incarceration. According to a Report Card prepared by the Arizona Supreme Court, the Arizona law: is “resulting in safer communities and more substance abusing probationers in recovery,” has already saved state taxpayers millions of dollars, and is helping more than 75% of program participants to remain drug free.

SECTION 3. Purpose and Intent

The People of the State of California hereby declare their purpose and intent in enacting this Act to be as follows:

    (a) To divert from incarceration into community-based substance abuse treatment programs non-violent defendants, probationers and parolees charged with simple drug possession or drug use offenses;

    (b) To halt the wasteful expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars each year on the incarceration � and re-incarceration � of non-violent drug users who would be better served by community-based treatment; and

    (c) To enhance public safety by reducing drug-related crime and preserving jails and prison cells for serious and violent offenders, and to improve public health by reducing drug abuse and drug dependence through proven and effective drug treatment strategies.

Return to the top

SECTION 4. Section 1210 is added to the Penal Code to read:

1210. Definitions.

As used in Penal Code sections 1210.1 and 3063.1, and Division 10.8 of the Health and Safety Code:

(a) The term “non-violent drug possession offense” means the unlawful possession, use, or transportation for personal use of any controlled substance identified in Health and Safety Code sections 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057 or 11058, or the offense of being under the influence of a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11550. The term “non-violent drug possession offense” shall not include possession for sale, production, or manufacturing of any controlled substance.

(b) The terms “drug treatment program” or “drug treatment” mean a licensed and/or certified community drug treatment program which may include one or more of the following: outpatient treatment, half-way house treatment, narcotic replacement therapy, drug education or prevention courses and/or limited inpatient or residential drug treatment as needed to address special detoxification or relapse situations or severe dependence. The terms “drug treatment program” or “drug treatment” shall not include drug treatment programs offered in a prison or jail facility.

(c) The term “successful completion of treatment” means that a defendant who has had drug treatment imposed as a condition of probation has completed the prescribed course of drug treatment and, as a result, there is reasonable cause to believe that the defendant will not abuse controlled substances in the future.

(d) The term “misdemeanor not related to the use of drugs” means a misdemeanor that does not involve (1) the simple possession or use of drugs or drug paraphernalia, being present where drugs are used, or failure to register as a drug offender or (2) any activity similar to those listed in (d)(1) above.

Return to the top

SECTION 5. Section 1210.1 is added to the Penal Code to read:

1210.1 Possession Of Controlled Substances; Probation; Exceptions.

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and except as provided in subdivision (b), any person convicted of a non-violent drug possession offense shall receive probation.

As a condition of probation the court shall require participation in and completion of an appropriate drug treatment program. The court may also impose as a condition of probation participation in vocational training, family counseling, literacy training and/or community service. A court may not impose incarceration as an additional condition of probation. Aside from the limitations imposed in this subdivision, the trial court is not otherwise limited in the type of probation conditions it may impose.

In addition to any fine assessed under other provisions of law, the trial judge may require any person convicted of a non-violent drug possession offense who is reasonably able to do so to contribute to the cost of their own placement in a drug treatment program.

    (b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to:

      (1) Any defendant who has previously been convicted of one or more serious or violent felonies in violation of Penal Code sections 667.5(c) or 1192.7, unless the non-violent drug possession offense occurred after a period of 5 years in which the defendant remained free of both prison custody and the commission of an offense which results in (a) a felony conviction other than a non-violent drug possession offense or (b) a misdemeanor conviction involving physical injury or the threat of physical injury to another person.

(2) Any defendant who, in addition to one or more non-violent drug possession offenses, has been convicted in the same proceeding of a misdemeanor not related to the use of drugs or any felony.

(3) Any defendant who:

(A) While using a firearm, unlawfully possesses any amount of (1) a substance containing either cocaine base, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, or (2) a liquid, non-liquid, plant substance, or hand-rolled cigarette, containing phencyclidine.

(B) While using a firearm, is unlawfully under the influence of cocaine base, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine or phencyclidine.

(4) Any defendant who refuses drug treatment as a condition of probation.

(5) Any defendant who (a) has two separate convictions for non-violent drug possession offenses (b) has participated in two separate courses of drug treatment pursuant to subdivision (a) and (c) is found by the court, by clear and convincing evidence, to be unamenable to any and all forms of available drug treatment. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the trial court shall sentence such defendants to 30 days in jail.

(c) Within 7 days of an order imposing probation under subdivision (a), the probation department shall notify the drug treatment provider designated to provide drug treatment under subdivision (a). Within 30 days of receiving that notice, the treatment provider shall prepare a treatment plan and forward it to the probation department. On a quarterly basis after the defendant begins the drug treatment program, the treatment provider shall prepare and forward a progress report to the probation department.

      (1) If at any point during the course of drug treatment the treatment provider notifies the probation department that the defendant is unamenable to the drug treatment being provided, but may be amenable to other drug treatments or related programs, the probation department may move the court to modify the terms of probation to ensure that defendant receives the alternative drug treatment or program.

(2) If at any point during the course of drug treatment the treatment provider notifies the probation department that the defendant is unamenable to the drug treatment provided and all other forms of drug treatment, the probation department may move to revoke probation. At the revocation hearing, unless the defendant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that there is a drug treatment program to which he is amenable, the court may revoke probation.

    (3) Drug treatment services provided by subdivision (a) as a required condition of probation may not exceed 12 months, provided, however, that additional aftercare services as a condition of probation may be required for up to six months.

(d) Dismissal of charges upon successful completion of drug treatment.

(1) At any time after completion of drug treatment, a defendant may petition the sentencing court for dismissal of the charges. If the court finds that defendant successfully completed drug treatment, and substantially complied with the conditions of probation, the conviction on which the probation was based shall be set aside and the court shall dismiss the indictment or information against the defendant. In addition, the arrest on which the conviction was based shall be deemed to have never occurred. Except as provided in subdivision (d)(2) and (d)(3) below, the defendant shall thereafter be released from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense of which he or she has been convicted.

(2) Dismissal of an indictment or information pursuant to subdivision (d)(1) does not permit a person to own, possess, or have in his or her custody or control any firearm capable of being concealed upon the person or prevent his or her conviction under Penal Code section 12021.

(3) Except as provided below, after an indictment or information is dismissed pursuant to subdivision (d)(1), the defendant may indicate in response to any question concerning his or her prior criminal record that he or she was not arrested or convicted for the offense. Except as provided below, a record pertaining to an arrest or conviction resulting in successful completion of a drug treatment program under this section shall not, without the defendant’s consent, be used in any way that could result in the denial of any employment, benefit, license, or certificate

Regardless of his or her successful completion of drug treatment, the arrest and conviction on which the probation was based may be recorded by the Department of Justice and disclosed in response to any peace officer application request or any law enforcement inquiry. Dismissal of an information or indictment under this section does not relieve a defendant of the obligation to disclose the arrest and conviction in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or application for public office, for a position as a peace officer as defined in section 830, for licensure by any state or local agency, for contracting with the California State Lottery, or for purposes of serving on a jury.

(e) Violation of Probation.

(1) If probation is revoked pursuant to the provisions of this subdivision, the defendant may be incarcerated pursuant to otherwise applicable law without regard to the provisions of this section.

(2) Non-drug related probation violations.

Where a defendant receives probation under subdivision (a), and violates that probation either by being arrested for an offense that is not a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a non-drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether probation shall be revoked. The court may modify or revoke probation if the alleged violation is proved.

(3) Drug related probation violations.

(A) Where a defendant receives probation under subdivision (a), and violates that probation either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense or by violating a drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether probation shall be revoked. The trial court shall revoke probation if the alleged probation violation is proved and the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant poses a danger to the safety of others. If the court does not revoke probation, it may intensify or alter the drug treatment plan.

(B) Where a defendant receives probation under subdivision (a), and for the second time violates that probation either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves for a second time to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether probation shall be revoked. The trial court shall revoke probation if the alleged probation violation is proved and the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence either that the defendant poses a danger to the safety of others or is unamenable to drug treatment. In determining whether a defendant is unamenable to drug treatment, the court may consider, to the extent relevant, whether the defendant (1) has committed a serious violation of rules at the drug treatment program, (2) has repeatedly committed violations of program rules that inhibit the defendant�s ability to function in the program, or (3) has continually refused to participate in the program or asked to be removed from the program. If the court does not revoke probation, it may intensify or alter the drug treatment plan.

(C) Where a defendant receives probation under subdivision (a), and for the third time violates that probation either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves for a third time to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether probation shall be revoked. If the alleged probation violation is proved, defendant is not eligible for continued probation under subdivision (a).

(D) Where a defendant on probation at the effective date of this act for a non-violent drug possession offense violates that probation either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine if probation shall be revoked. The trial court shall revoke probation if the alleged probation violation is proved and the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant poses a danger to the safety of others. If the court does not revoke probation, it may modify probation and impose as an additional condition participation in a drug treatment program.

(E) Where a defendant on probation at the effective date of this act for a non-violent drug possession offense violates that probation a second time either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves for a second time to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether probation shall be revoked. The trial court shall revoke probation if the alleged probation violation is proved and the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence either that the defendant poses a danger to the safety of others or is unamenable to drug treatment. If the court does not revoke probation, it may modify probation and impose as an additional condition participation in a drug treatment program.

(F) Where a defendant on probation at the effective date of this act for a non-violent drug offense violates that probation a third time either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of probation, and the state moves for a third time to revoke probation, the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether probation shall be revoked. If the alleged probation violation is proved, defendant is not eligible for continued probation under subdivision (a).

Return to the top

SECTION 6. Section 3063.1 is added to the Penal Code to read:

3063.1. Possession Of Controlled Substances; Parole; Exceptions.

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and except as provided in subdivision (b), parole may not be suspended or revoked for commission of a non-violent drug possession offense or for violating any drug-related condition of parole.

As an additional condition of parole for all such offenses or violations, the Parole Authority shall require participation in and completion of an appropriate drug treatment program. Vocational training, family counseling and literacy training may be imposed as additional parole conditions.

The Parole Authority may require any person on parole who commits a non-violent drug possession offense or violates any drug-related condition of parole, and who is reasonably able to do so, to contribute to the cost of their own placement in a drug treatment program.

(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to:

(1) Any parolee who has been convicted of one or more serious or violent felonies in violation of Penal Code sections 667.5(c) or 1192.7.

(2) Any parolee who, while on parole commits one or more non-violent drug possession offenses and is found to have concurrently committed a misdemeanor not related to the use of drugs or any felony.

(3) Any parolee who refuses drug treatment as a condition of parole.

(c) Within 7 days of a finding that the parolee has either committed a non-violent drug possession offense or violated any drug-related condition of parole, the Parole Authority shall notify the treatment provider designated to provide drug treatment under subdivision (a). Within 30 days thereafter the treatment provider shall prepare a drug treatment plan and forward it to the Parole Authority and to the California Department of Corrections Parole Division Agent responsible for supervising the parolee. On a quarterly basis after the parolee begins drug treatment, the treatment provider shall prepare and forward a progress report to these entities and individuals.

(1) If at any point during the course of drug treatment the treatment provider notifies the Parole Authority that the parolee is unamenable to the drug treatment provided, but amenable to other drug treatments or related programs, the Parole Authority may act to modify the terms of parole to ensure that the parolee receives the alternative drug treatment or program.

(2) If at any point during the course of drug treatment the treatment provider notifies the Parole Authority that the parolee is unamenable to the drug treatment provided and all other forms of drug treatment, the Parole Authority may act to revoke parole. At the revocation hearing, parole may be revoked unless the parolee proves by a preponderance of the evidence that there is a drug treatment program to which he is amenable.

      (3) Drug treatment services provided by subdivision (a) as a required condition of parole may not exceed 12 months, provided, however, that additional aftercare services as a condition of probation may be required for up to six months.

(d) Violation of Parole.

(1) If parole is revoked pursuant to the provisions of this subdivision, the defendant may be incarcerated pursuant to otherwise applicable law without regard to the provisions of this section.

(2) Non-drug related parole violations.

Where a parolee receives drug treatment under subdivision (a), and during the course of drug treatment violates parole either by being arrested for an offense other than a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a non drug-related condition of parole, and the Parole Authority acts to revoke parole, a hearing shall be conducted to determine whether parole shall be revoked. Parole may be modified or revoked if the parole violation is proved. 

(3) Drug related parole violations.

(A) Where a parolee receives drug treatment under subdivision (a), and during the course of drug treatment violates parole either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of parole, and the Parole Authority acts to revoke parole, a hearing shall be conducted to determine whether parole shall be revoked. Parole shall be revoked where the parole violation is proved and a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the parolee poses a danger to the safety of others. If parole is not revoked, the conditions of parole may be intensified to achieve the goals of drug treatment.

    (B) Where a parolee receives drug treatment under subdivision (a), and during the course of drug treatment for the second time violates that parole either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of parole, and the Parole Authority acts for a second time to revoke parole, a hearing shall be conducted to determine whether parole shall be revoked. If the alleged parole violation is proved the parolee is not eligible for continued parole under any provision of this section and may be re-incarcerated.

(C) Where a parolee already on parole at the effective date of this act violates that parole either by being arrested for a non-violent drug possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of parole, and the Parole Authority acts to revoke parole, a hearing shall be conducted to determine whether parole shall be revoked. Parole shall be revoked where the parole violation is proved and a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the parolee poses a danger to the safety of others. If parole is not revoked, the conditions of parole may be modified to include participation in a drug treatment program as provided in subdivision (a). This paragraph will not apply to any parolee who at the effective date of this act has been convicted of one or more serious or violent felonies in violation of Penal Code sections 667.5(c) or 1192.7.

(D) Where a parolee already on parole at the effective date of this act violates that parole for the second time either by being arrested for a non-violent drug-possession offense, or by violating a drug-related condition of parole, and the Parole Authority acts for a second time to revoke parole, a hearing shall be conducted to determine whether parole shall be revoked. If the alleged parole violation is proved, the parolee is not eligible for continued parole under any provision of this section and may be re-incarcerated. 

Return to the top

SECTION 7. Division 10.8 is added to the Health & Safety Code to read:

Division 10.8. Substance Abuse Treatment Funding.

    11999.4 Establishment Of The Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund.

A special fund to be known as the “Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund” is created within the State Treasury which is continuously appropriated for carrying out the purposes of this division.

11999.5 Funding Appropriation

Upon passage of this Act, $60,000,000 shall be continuously appropriated from the General Fund to the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund for the 2000-2001 fiscal year. There is hereby continuously appropriated from the General Fund to the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund an additional $120,000,000 annually for the 2001-2002 fiscal year, and an additional sum of $120,000,000 in each such subsequent fiscal year concluding with the 2005-2006 fiscal year. These funds shall be transferred to the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund on July 1 of each of these specified fiscal years. Funds transferred to the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund are not subject to annual appropriation by the Legislature and may by used without a time limit. Nothing in this section shall preclude additional appropriations by the Legislature to the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund.

11999.6 Distribution Of Monies From Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund

Monies deposited in the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund shall be distributed annually by the secretary of the Health and Welfare Agency through the State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs to counties to cover the costs of placing persons in and providing (1) drug treatment programs under this Act and (2) vocational training, family counseling and literacy training under this Act. Additional costs that may be reimbursed from the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund include probation department costs, court monitoring costs and any miscellaneous costs made necessary by the provisions of this Act other than drug testing services of any kind. Such monies shall be allocated to counties through a fair and equitable distribution formula that includes, but is not limited to, per capita arrests for controlled substance possession violations and substance abuse treatment caseload, as determined by the department as necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act. The department may reserve a portion of the fund to pay for direct contracts with drug treatment service providers in counties or areas in which the department director has determined that demand for drug treatment services is not adequately met by existing programs. However, nothing in this section shall be interpreted or construed to allow any entity to use funds from the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund to supplant funds from any existing fund source or mechanism currently used to provide substance abuse treatment.

11999.7 Local Government Authority to Control Location of Drug Treatment Programs

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no community drug treatment program may receive any funds from the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund unless the program agrees to make its facilities subject to valid local government zoning ordinances and development agreements.

11999.8 Surplus Funds

Any funds remaining in the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund at the end of a fiscal year may be utilized to pay for drug treatment programs to be carried out in the subsequent fiscal year.

11999.9 Annual Evaluation Process

The department shall annually conduct a study to evaluate the effectiveness and financial impact of the programs which are funded pursuant to the requirements of this Act. The study shall include, but not be limited to, a study of the implementation process, a review of lower incarceration costs, reductions in crime, reduced prison and jail construction, reduced welfare costs, the adequacy of funds appropriated, and any other impacts or issues the department can identify.

11999.10 Outside Evaluation Process

The department shall allocate up to 0.5% of the fund’s total monies each year for a long term study to be conducted by a public university in California aimed at evaluating the effectiveness and financial impact of the programs which are funded pursuant to the requirements of this Act.

11999.11 County Reports

Counties shall submit a report annually to the department detailing the numbers and characteristics of clients-participants served as a result of funding provided by this Act. The department shall promulgate a form which shall be used by the counties for the reporting of this information, as well as any other information that may be required by the department. The department shall establish a deadline by which the counties shall submit their reports.

11999.12 Audit Of Expenditures

The department shall annually audit the expenditures made by any county which is funded, in whole or in part, with funds provided by this Act. Counties shall repay to the department any funds that are not spent in accordance with the requirements of this Act.

11999.13 Excess Funds

At the end of each fiscal year, a county may retain unspent funds received from the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund and may spend those funds, if approved by the department, on drug programs that further the purposes of this Act. 

Return to the top

SECTION 8. Effective Date

Except as otherwise provided, the provisions of this Act shall become effective July 1, 2001, and its provisions shall be applied prospectively.

SECTION 9. Amendment

This Act may be amended only by a roll call vote of two-thirds of the membership of both houses of the Legislature. All amendments to this Act shall be to further the Act and shall be consistent with its purposes.

SECTION 10. Severability

If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this initiative which can be given effect without the invalid or unconstitutional provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this initiative are severable.

Return to the top

Original source

Categories
Articles

Full Text of Oregon ballot Measure 3 – Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000

Full Text
back to summary

Ballot Measure 3
Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000 

1.  BALLOT TITLE:  The Office of the Secretary of State received a certified ballot title from the Attorney General on February 4, 2000, for initiative petition #130, proposing a constitutional amendment, for the General Election of November 7, 2000.

The certified ballot title is as follows:

Amends Constitution: Requires Conviction Before Forfeiture; Restricts Proceeds Usage; Requires Reporting, Penalty

RESULT OF “YES” VOTE: “Yes” vote requires conviction before property forfeiture; restricts use of proceeds; requires reporting; declares penalty.

RESULT OF “NO” VOTE: “No” vote rejects: requiring conviction before forfeiture; restricting use of proceeds; requiring reporting; declaring penalty.

2.  SUMMARY: Amends constitution. Current law does not require conviction before property forfeiture. Measure prohibits property forfeiture unless owner or interest-holder has been convicted of crime involving property. Forfeited property?s value must be proportional to crime. Contraband, unclaimed property may be forfeited without conviction. Forfeited property?s sale must be conducted in commercially reasonable manner. Prohibits applying sale proceeds to law enforcement. Sets priorities for distribution: foreclosed liens, security interests, contracts; forfeiture costs; state drug treatment. Restricts transferring proceedings to federal government. Requires reporting, penalty. Other provisions.

Chief Petitioner(s): Ray Heslep, 719 Sunnyside Dr, Eugene, OR 97404.

3.  TEXT
Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by a vote of the People to include the following new section:

Section 10. The Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000. (1) This section may be known and shall be cited as the “Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000.”

(2) Statement of principles. The People, in the exercise of the power reserved to them under the Constitution of the State of Oregon, declare that:

(a) A basic tenet of a democratic society is that a person is presumed innocent and should not be punished until proven guilty;

(b) The property of a person should not be forfeited in a forfeiture proceeding by government unless and until that person is convicted of a crime involving the property;

(c) The value of property forfeited should be proportional to the specific conduct for which the owner of the property has been convicted; and

(d) Proceeds from forfeited property should be used for treatment of drug abuse unless otherwise specified by law for another purpose.

(3) Forfeitures prohibited without conviction. No judgment of forfeiture of property in a civil forfeiture proceeding by the State or any of its political subdivisions shall be allowed or entered until and unless the owner of the property is convicted of a crime in Oregon or another jurisdiction and the property is found by clear and convincing evidence to have been instrumental in committing or facilitating the crime or to be proceeds of that crime. The value of the property forfeited under the provisions of this subsection shall not be excessive and shall be substantially proportional to the specific conduct for which the owner of the property has been convicted. For purposes of this section, “property” means any interest in anything of value, including the whole of any lot or tract of land and tangible and intangible personal property, including currency, instruments or securities or any other kind of privilege, interest, claim or right whether due or to become due. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a person from voluntarily giving a judgment of forfeiture.

(4) Protection of innocent property owners. In a civil forfeiture proceeding if a financial institution claiming an interest in the property demonstrates that it holds an interest, its interest shall not be subject to forfeiture.

In a civil forfeiture proceeding if a person claiming an interest in the property, other than a financial institution or a defendant who has been charged with or convicted of a crime involving that property, demonstrates that the person has an interest in the property, that person?s interest shall not be subject to forfeiture unless:

(a) The forfeiting agency proves by clear and convincing evidence that the person took the property or the interest with the intent to defeat the forfeiture; or

(b) A conviction under subsection (3) is later obtained against the person.

(5) Exception for unclaimed property and contraband. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (3) of this section, if, following notice to all persons known to have an interest or who may have an interest, no person claims an interest in the seized property or if the property is contraband, a judgment of forfeiture may be allowed and entered without a criminal conviction. For purposes of this subsection, “contraband” means personal property, articles or things, including but not limited to controlled substances or drug paraphernalia, that a person is prohibited by Oregon statute or local ordinance from producing, obtaining or possessing.

(6) Law enforcement seizures unaffected. Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the temporary seizure of property for evidentiary, forfeiture, or protective purposes, or to alter the power of the Governor to remit fines or forfeitures under Article V, Section 14, of this Constitution.

(7) Disposition of property and proceeds to drug treatment. Any sale of forfeited property shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner. Property or proceeds forfeited under subsections (3), (5), or (8) of this section shall not be used for law enforcement purposes but shall be distributed or applied in the following order:

(a) To the satisfaction of any foreclosed liens, security interests and contracts in the order of their priority;

(b) To the State or any of its political subdivisions for actual and reasonable expenses related to the costs of the forfeiture proceeding, including attorney fees, storage, maintenance, management, and disposition of the property incurred in connection with the sale of any forfeited property in an amount not to exceed twenty-five percent of the total proceeds in any single forfeiture;

(c) To the State or any of its political subdivisions to be used exclusively for drug treatment, unless another disposition is specially provided by law.

(8) State and federal sharing. The State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions shall take all necessary steps to obtain shared property or proceeds from the United States Department of Justice resulting from a forfeiture. Any property or proceeds received from the United States Department of Justice by the State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions shall be applied as provided in subsection (7) of this section.

(9) Restrictions on State transfers. Neither the State of Oregon, its political subdivisions, nor any forfeiting agency shall transfer forfeiture proceedings to the federal government unless a state court has affirmatively found that:

(a) The activity giving rise to the forfeiture is interstate in nature and sufficiently complex to justify the transfer;

(b) The seized property may only be forfeited under federal law; or

(c) Pursuing forfeiture under state law would unduly burden the state forfeiting agencies.

(10) Penalty for violations. Any person acting under color of law, official title or position who takes any action intending to conceal, transfer, withhold, retain, divert or otherwise prevent any proceeds, conveyances, real property, or any things of value forfeited under the law of this State or the United States from being applied, deposited or used in accordance with subsections (7), (8), or (9) of this section shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount treble the value of the forfeited property concealed, transferred, withheld, retained or diverted. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to impair judicial immunity if otherwise applicable.

(11) Reporting requirement. All forfeiting agencies shall report the nature and disposition of all property and proceeds seized for forfeiture or forfeited to a State asset forfeiture oversight committee that is independent of any forfeiting agency. The asset forfeiture oversight committee shall generate and make available to the public an annual report of the information collected. The asset forfeiture oversight committee shall also make recommendations to ensure that asset forfeiture proceedings are handled in a manner that is fair to innocent property owners and interest holders.

(12) Severability. If any part of this section or its application to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid for any reason, then the remaining parts or applications to any persons or circumstances shall not be affected but shall remain in full force and effect.

4.  FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT:

November 7, 2000, General Election
Ballot Measure 3
Amends Constitution: Requires Conviction Before Forfeiture; Restricts Proceeds Usage; Requires Reporting, Penalty

There may be a reduction in state and local revenue due to a stricter standard of evidence required for forfeitures under the measure, but the amount can not be determined.

There is no effect on state or local government expenditures.

Go To Measure Page

Return to November 7, 2000 General Election Page

Return to Elections Division Main Page

Categories
Articles

I’m In – A Parent Pledge

Declaration

I want a “substance-free” childhood for my kids and their friends.

I pledge to:

  1. Protect my kids and their friends from potential harm by not providing them with marijuana, alcohol or nicotine.
  2. Actively supervise parties hosted at my house and ask attendees to hand over alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs if found.
  3. Prioritize prevention, use-cessation and delay among the things I parent.
  4. Examine my behavior and modify it if I believe it’s moving my child towards substance use.
  5. Continue my education and be in conversation with other parents to align our efforts in keeping our kids safe from marijuana, alcohol, and other drug use.
  6. Notice legislation, local initiatives, and leaders that seek to grant more Industry access (alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine) to my kids and others in our community.
  7. Welcome the involvement of others in the community (kids, other parents, schools, law enforcement, health care professionals, business and faith leaders, etc.) who share the goal of the I’m in movement – everyone’s influence matters.

Because I have come to understand:

  1. There are 3 main gateway drugs for 12-17 year-olds: marijuana, alcohol and nicotine.
  2. Family history of addiction puts children at an increased risk for addiction themselves.
  3. Adult addiction is increasingly being seen as a childhood onset disease with research showing 90% of adult addicts starting the use of some addictive drug before age 18.
  4. The brain is actively under construction and rapidly developing until approximately age 25.
  5. The ideas that “kids will be kids” or that “alcohol and marijuana are a rite of passage in high school” put youth at risk.
  6. Substance use in high school needs to be quickly addressed as does use in middle school. It starts potential damage to the developing brain even earlier and increases the likelihood of use in high school – compromising the opportunity for real adolescent growth along all pathways, i.e. academic, social, emotional, physical, neurological, etc.
  7. So far, marijuana legalization has been an exercise in commercialization (marketing/advertising/promotion/ wide distribution/etc), which has lead to increased access to the drug and an arbitrary reduction in the perception of harm surrounding marijuana use. Low access and high perception of harm are two known Environmental Factors that protect kids from underage use. Legalization exposes a greater number of kids to marijuana use and its harms.

And I recognize that:

  1. Adolescence is an inherently stressful time socially and academically. It’s important for my child to navigate these times through substance-free tactics so that real life skills for coping, social interaction, stress reduction and intimacy building are developed.
  2. Messaging from industry and social sources increasingly “normalizes” substance use. Parental opinion and messaging around marijuana, nicotine, alcohol, and other drugs needs to become stronger and louder to counteract these external sources.
  3. I do have significant influence in my child’s life when it comes to alcohol, marijuana and other drug use.

Sign

the “I’m in” pledge to find out how parents of the 21st Century are making a difference and to join Parent Movement 2.0.

Categories
Articles

National Families in Action A Guide to the Drug-Legalization Movement


Home

Commentary

Initiatives

Organizations

People

State Rankings

Back to NFIA

Search NFIA

People

 

George Soros

Occupation
  Chairman

Institution

 

Soros Management Fund
Open Society Institute

Contributions
   Since 1991, Mr. Soros has contributed to:

Alaska 1998 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Passed)

Arizona 1996 Proposition 200 (Passed)
Arizona 1998 Proposition 105 (Passed)
Arizona 2000 Proposition 201 (Failed to reach ballot)
Arizona 2002 Proposition 203 (On ballot)

California 1996 Proposition 215 (Passed)
California 2000 Proposition 36 (Passed)

Colorado 1998 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Passed)
Colorado 2000 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Passed but invalidated)

District of Columbia 1998 Initiative 59 (Passed but invalidated)
District of Colimbia 2002 Measure 62 (On ballot)

Florida 2000 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Failed to reach ballot)
Florida 2002 Treatment Initiative (Failed to reach ballot)

Maine 1999 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Passed)

Massachusetts 2000 Petition P
(Defeated)

Michigan 2002 Initiative (Failed to reach ballot)

Nevada 1998 Question 9 (Passed)
Nevada 2000 Question 9 (Passed)

Ohio 2002 State Issue 1 (On ballot)

Oregon 1998 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Passed)
Oregon 2000 Ballot Measure 3 (Passed)

Utah 2000 Initiative B (Passed)

Washington 1997 Intitiative (Defeated)
Washington 1998 Medical Marijuana Initiative (Passed)

 


About • Site Map • Privacy
© Copyright 2001 National Families in Action. All rights reserved.
Questions? Write to [email protected]. Last updated: 08/19/2024 15:34:20

Categories
Articles

National Families in Action A Guide to the Drug-Legalization Movement




Home

Commentary

People

Back to NFIA

Search NFIA


Organizations


Index

 

 

A
Americans for Medical Rights
Anti-Prohibitionist Radical Co-Ordination
Arizonans for Drug Policy Reform

C
Californians for Medical Rights
Campaign for New Drug Policies
Coalition for Fair Treatment
Common Sense for Drug Policy
Coloradans for Medical Rights
Criminal Justice Policy Foundation

D
Drug Policy Foundation
Drug Reform Coordination Network

F
Families Against Mandatory Minimums
Floridians for Medical Rights
Forfeiture Endangers American Rights
Foundation on Drug Policy and Human Rights

H
The Harm Reduction Coalition

I
International Foundation for Drug Policy and Human Rights International Harm Reduction Coalition

L
The Lindesmith Center
The Lindesmith Center West

M
Marijuana Policy Project
Media Awareness Project
Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS)

N
National Drug Strategy Network
Nevadans for Medical Rights
National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
NORML Foundation
The November Coalition

P
The People Have Spoken
Plants Are Medicine

U
Utahns for Property Protection

    

 

            

                              

About • Site Map • Privacy
© Copyright 2001 National Families in Action. All rights reserved.
Questions? Write to [email protected]. Last updated: 08/19/2024 15:37:09

 

 
Categories
Articles

Welcome to NFIA’s Voters’ Guide

What This Guide Contains
Welcome to National Families in Action’s Guide to Drug-Related Ballot Initiatives. This guide provides a comprehensive understanding of the issues that underlie drug initiatives placed on state ballots since 1996. Features include:

Commentary
Sponsors explain how they are using the ballot initiative process to legalize drugs.

Initiatives
A state-by-state list of drug initiatives. Click the title of an initiative to read:

Summary
Full Text
Sponsors
Opponents
Analysis
Funders
What Proponents Say
What Opponents Say
Dependency and Use Ranking

Organizations
A list of organizations that sponsor, fund, oppose, support, or oppose the initiatives. Click these links for detailed profiles of each.

People
A list of people who sponsor, fund, oppose, support, or oppose the initiatives. Click these links for detailed profiles of each.

State Rankings
A list of all states, ranked by levels of drug dependence and drug use. With few exceptions, initiative states (in red) have the highest levels of drug use and drug dependence in the nation.