Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
News (Media Awareness Project) - US OK: Editorial: State Should Address DA Forfeiture Filings
Title:US OK: Editorial: State Should Address DA Forfeiture Filings
Published On:2005-08-02
Source:Muskogee Daily Phoenix (OK)
Fetched On:2008-08-20 00:48:37
STATE SHOULD ADDRESS DA FORFEITURE FILINGS

Oklahoma needs a clear law regarding the payment of court costs on the
filing of forfeitures by county district attorneys.

The Phoenix reported recently that Muskogee County District Attorney John
David Luton has been billed $20,871 on 228 cases since 2004 by the county
court clerk for court costs on civil forfeiture cases.

Luton says his office does not owe the fees, and a survey of other DA
offices in the state show that some pay the costs, others don't. Richard
Gray, the DA for Adair, Cherokee, Sequoyah and Wagoner counties, said he
hasn't been paying the costs. Mike Boring, district attorney for Beaver,
Harper, Cimarron and Texas counties says he pays because the money helps
the court clerk's office.

The forfeiture cases involve money, vehicles, tools, equipment and other
objects of value that the drug task forces of district attorneys seize in
the course of police work against drug activity. Judges must sign
forfeiture orders, and the orders are kept on file by court clerks for
record-keeping purposes and public access.

District Judge Tom Alford told the Phoenix he believes the DA should not
have to pay the costs because forfeitures are judgments distinct from other
types of judgments that require assessment of court costs.

However, it seems that forfeiture filings are money judgments requiring
tracking beyond the DA's office. The July 24 Phoenix story reported the
DA's drug task force seized $32,730 in cash from a Michigan man in 2003 and
the money was forfeited. While the money did not move through the court
clerk's office or the courts, the paperwork did.

That's why the state assigns court costs, $91 on the Michigan man's
forfeiture, to make sure judges and clerks are paid and courtrooms and
court clerk offices have funds with which to operate.

Still we respect Judge Alford's opinion and in the end, he may very well be
correct.

But we would hope that the state Supreme Court or someone else with
authority in the state would clear up the matter so district attorneys in
the state are acting uniformly.
Member Comments
No member comments available...