TRUCK SEIZED IN MISS. DRUG ARREST RETURNED TO OWNER

The Mississippi Supreme Court on Thursday returned to a Pontotoc man a
pickup seized by the city of New Albany following a 1995 drug arrest.

Chief Justice Lenore Prather said Ricky Galloway's situation falls under
the innocent owner exception to the state's forfeiture law and the seizure
of the truck violates the excessive penalty provision of the Mississippi
Constitution.

Galloway had argued in his appeal to the court that the vehicle should be
returned because the charges were dismissed. Galloway contended New Albany
officials refused to return the truck despite evidence showing he was
innocent of the drug charges.

According to court records, Galloway's pickup was seized after a narcotics
agent pressured Galloway's then-wife to sell him some of her prescription
medicine. The truck was used to deliver the medicine.

Galloway, a furniture plant worker, argued he had no knowledge that his
then-wife was selling her pain medicine when he drove her to meet her
ex-husband and believed she was collecting a child support payment.

In July 1998, Circuit Judge Barry Ford dropped Galloway's drug charges
saying there was "no evidence" of Galloway's involvement in a drug deal.
Galloway's then-wife, who had told officials Galloway knew nothing about
her trans-action, was also acquitted of her charges when a jury ruled she
was entrapped in the drug deal.

Despite dismissal of the charges, New Albany officials continued forfeiture
proceedings on Galloway's truck a month later arguing that he knew or
"willfully blinded himself" to the drug sale.

Circuit Judge Thomas Gardner ruled in favor of the city based on
prosecutors' argument that circumstantial evidence shows Galloway turned a
blind eye to the transaction.

The unanimous Supreme Court disagreed.

"In the case . . . the owner of the seized property was acquitted of
criminal wrongdoing. There is no credible evidence to connect Ricky
Galloway with the sale of drugs, a matter which had already been
adjudicated in the criminal trial," Prather wrote for the court.

She said the justices have previously held that forfeiture of a vehicle was
grossly disproportionate - even where the property owner was found guilty
of possession of a small amount of cocaine.