An exploratory analysis of federal litigation in the United States challenging asset forfeiture

Shaun L. Gabbidon, George E. Higgins, Favian Martin, Matthew Nelson, Jimmy Brown

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94% were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff 's winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)50-64
Number of pages15
JournalCriminal Justice Policy Review
Volume22
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2011

Fingerprint

assets
criminal proceedings
corporation
appeal
gender

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Law

Cite this

Gabbidon, Shaun L. ; Higgins, George E. ; Martin, Favian ; Nelson, Matthew ; Brown, Jimmy. / An exploratory analysis of federal litigation in the United States challenging asset forfeiture. In: Criminal Justice Policy Review. 2011 ; Vol. 22, No. 1. pp. 50-64.
@article{1fbf231f20174fc8aa507d97a583e0f0,
title = "An exploratory analysis of federal litigation in the United States challenging asset forfeiture",
abstract = "This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94{\%} were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff 's winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research.",
author = "Gabbidon, {Shaun L.} and Higgins, {George E.} and Favian Martin and Matthew Nelson and Jimmy Brown",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0887403410365895",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "50--64",
journal = "Criminal Justice Policy Review",
issn = "0887-4034",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

An exploratory analysis of federal litigation in the United States challenging asset forfeiture. / Gabbidon, Shaun L.; Higgins, George E.; Martin, Favian; Nelson, Matthew; Brown, Jimmy.

In: Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 22, No. 1, 01.03.2011, p. 50-64.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - An exploratory analysis of federal litigation in the United States challenging asset forfeiture

AU - Gabbidon, Shaun L.

AU - Higgins, George E.

AU - Martin, Favian

AU - Nelson, Matthew

AU - Brown, Jimmy

PY - 2011/3/1

Y1 - 2011/3/1

N2 - This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94% were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff 's winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research.

AB - This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94% were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff 's winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79751486061&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79751486061&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0887403410365895

DO - 10.1177/0887403410365895

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 50

EP - 64

JO - Criminal Justice Policy Review

JF - Criminal Justice Policy Review

SN - 0887-4034

IS - 1

ER -