GOSHEN - Orange County legislators on Thursday passed a law allowing authorities to seize defendants' cash and cars in misdemeanor drug cases, despite fierce opposition from Democratic lawmakers and audience members who spoke before the meeting.

The asset-forfeiture law that District Attorney David Hoovler proposed in August has been cast as a way to redirect a share of the assets the county already pursues in felony cases under state law, sending that money to the county general fund instead of Albany. Hoovler has told lawmakers that prosecutors could keep that money in Goshen simply by invoking the proposed county law instead of the state law in drug cases involving both felonies and misdemeanors. Authorities would keep the seized property only if the defendant is convicted.

But legislators heard a storm of protest on Thursday from audience members, who argued that asset-forfeiture laws are an unconstitutional violation of due-process rights and ripe for abuse. They said such laws unfairly target the poor and minorities - who might lack the means to fight an unlawful seizure in court - and improperly introduce a profit motive into law enforcement, where it doesn't belong.

"The greatest offense of all," argued Aimee Fitzgerald of Central Valley, is that the law offers no "guarantee of punishment for the potential abuse of the law by its authors, enablers and enforcers."

Civil-rights attorney Michael Sussman warned of a possible legal challenge, and questioned how conservative Republicans could support a law that "increases the power of the state with no due process being given."

Chris Borek, the county's chief assistant district attorney, countered that the "horror stories" critics cite have happened in other states, and said that New York's asset-forfeiture rules have safeguards against abuse.

Democrats argued passionately against the law during the legislative debate. "It's hard to find anybody except the ones who are going to benefit from it who support it," said Matt Turnbull of Hamptonburgh, who called the proposal "policing for profit" and warned that assets could be seized "based solely on a misdemeanor."

Shannon Wong of Goshen said the additional revenue it promised was "not worth the risks."

The 12-9 vote in favor of the law fell along party lines, with all 11 Republicans and an Independence Party member in support and all nine Democrats in opposition.

cmckenna@th-record.com