Police tape.JPG

(MLive.com | File)

LANSING, MI -- The Michigan House of Representatives on Thursday signed off on a plan to begin reforming the state's civil asset forfeiture laws, which allow police to confiscate property linked to alleged crimes regardless of conviction.

The bipartisan eight-bill package, approved by large majorities and now headed to the Senate, would require new forfeiture reporting by law enforcement agencies and increase the burden of proof required to keep seized property.

One measure, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Irwin, would prohibit police from seeking forfeiture of a vehicle used by someone to purchase less than one ounce of marijuana for personal use.

"The idea here was to create a bright line for our partners in law enforcement that if you're talking about small-time pot possession, that is not an offense that should engender asset forfeiture," said Irwin, D-Ann Arbor, whose bill advanced in a 81-28 vote.

"You shouldn't have your car taken. You shouldn't have your cash taken. You shouldn't have your phone taken. This is a misdemeanor, not a major crime."

Michigan allows law enforcement agencies to sell and retain proceeds from confiscated property, which helps them supplement budgets. But critics say the program incentivizes seizures and invites abuse.

Five of the bills in the package would increase reporting requirements for law enforcement agencies, requiring them to document details about drug, public nuisance and identity theft cases that involve seizures or forfeiture proceedings.

Gathering more data about civil asset forfeiture practices will help the state determine other reforms that may be worth pursuing in the future, according to House Judiciary Chairman Klint Kesto, R-Commerce Township.

"We have to have uniformity. We need to have transparency, and we need to have accountability," he said in a floor speech.

While criminal cases are adjudicated in criminal court, forfeiture cases go through civil court, where the burden of proof is lower.

Two bills in the package advanced Thursday would raise evidentiary standards in drug and public nuisance forfeiture cases, making it easier for an individual to win back their property if they are not charged or convicted in criminal court.

Current law requires "a preponderance the evidence" in civil forfeiture proceedings, but the legislation advanced Thursday would require prosecutors to show "clear and convincing evidence" that seized property was linked to a crime.

"The whole point of the package, and my bill in particular, is to protect the personal property rights of people who are not convicted of a crime and may not even be charged with a crime," said state Rep. Gary Glenn, R-Midland, who sponsored the public nuisance legislation.

Michigan's civil asset forfeiture laws made national news in recent weeks after committee testimony from two registered medical marijuana patients who said their homes were raided by members of a drug task force.

"They have had my stuff for 10 months," said Ginnifer Hency, whose criminal case was recently dismissed when a judge determined that a crime did not occur. "My ladders, my iPads, my children's iPads, my children's phones, my medicine for my patients. Why a ladder? Why my vibrator? I don't know either. Why TVs?"

Michigan police agencies reported $24.3 million in civil asset forfeitures in 2013, according to the Michigan State Police. That figure only include drug cases, however, and eight percent of agencies did not file any reports that year.

Civil asset forfeiture reform is sweeping the country. Legislation has been introduced in 25 or 30 states this year, according to Jennifer Moll of the Coalition for Public Safety, a national group that promotes a smarter criminal justice system.

She called the Michigan bills "an excellent step" towards ensuring due process rights.

Raising the evidentiary standards, in particular, "will make sure that we're not saying that property owners are guilty before they are proven innocent," Moll said.

While the current package faces an unknown future in the state Senate, there's already talk that the House could consider additional asset forfeiture bills this year, including pending legislation that would address bonding requirements in civil court.

Some reform advocates want Michigan to follow in the footsteps of New Mexico, which took an aggressive step by prohibiting any civil asset forfeiture without a criminal conviction. Irwin supports that approach and has introduced similar legislation, but he also praised the package approved Thursday.

The reporting requirements are "genuinely meaningful" and not just a bureaucratic effort, Irwin said, because they will require law enforcement agencies to report exactly how they are using current forfeiture laws and whose property they are seizing.

"This is going to allow us to get to the bottom of the key question, which is, is asset forfeiture being used to steal the assets of people who are otherwise complying with the law, like medical marijuana patients, or is asset forfeiture being used against the Pablo Escobars and gang leaders of the world?"

Editor's note: This post was corrected to reflect the change in evidentiary standards under the House package, which had been reversed.

Jonathan Oosting is a Capitol reporter for MLive Media Group. Email him, find him on Facebook or follow him on Twitter.