Asset Forfeiture Report: Maryland
| Grades* |
|
State Law Evasion Grade |
Final Grade |
|
Maryland
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Forfeiture Law |
|
Procedurally, Maryland does not afford strong protections to property owners swept up in civil forfeiture, but it does eliminate the profit incentive. Property can be forfeited under a preponderance of the evidence standard; the government must merely prove it is more likely than not that the property was involved in a crime, a far lower standard than beyond a reasonable doubt. Property owners are effectively “guilty until proven innocent”: To contest a seizure, the property owner must prove that the property was wrongfully seized or that the owner did not have actual knowledge of the conduct. But Maryland civil forfeiture law, unlike most other states, avoids creating a profit incentive for local law enforcement. All proceeds from civil forfeiture flow to the state general fund or the local governing body. 1 DeSantis v. State, 866 A.2d 143 (Md. 2005).
|
|
Press Releases and News
|
||
|
|
||
| From the Report: Canine Sniffs Yield Unreliable Evidence for Forfeiture |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| Forfeitures as Reported to LEMAS (Drug-related only) |
|||||||||||||||
|
| Equitable Sharing Proceeds from the Assets Forfeiture Fund (AFF) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| Freedom of Information Data |
|
No Data Available; Not Required to Collect
|
*Learn how states were graded and how data was collected
Return to Forfeiture Main Page







