ROADSIDE DEALS OUTSIDE LAW

Asset Forfeiture Lawyer Condemns Seizure Of Property For Drug Funds

Law enforcement agencies that seize money from drug suspects under the
guise of obtaining a contribution to their drug funds circumvent state law
and expose themselves to allegations of criminal wrongdoing, the lawyer in
charge of Tennessee's asset forfeiture program said.

In a recent interview prompted by the indictment of two Loudon County
deputies on extortion charges, Tennessee Department of Safety lawyer Joe
Bartlett condemned such practices.

"We don't want agencies extorting money from individuals or giving the
appearance of extorting money," Bartlett said.

Bartlett said he's disturbed by the Loudon County case, which centers on
two deputies who seized cash from a suspect during a 2002 traffic stop.

Deputy Paul E. Curtis stopped Eddie W. Witt of Soddy-Daisy on Interstate
75. A police dog indicated the presence of drugs in Witt's vehicle. No
drugs were found, but Witt had a pistol and a bank bag containing nearly
$20,000 in cash.

Witt told the News Sentinel that Chief Deputy Tony Aikens negotiated a
$9,649.25 "contribution" to the sheriff's office drug fund. In exchange,
Witt got to keep $10,000 and his car.

Witt, who was never charged with a drug crime, later sued. The parties
settled for the return of the "contribution." Witt's lawyer, Jes Beard,
convinced a Loudon County grand jury late last year to indict Aikens and
Curtis for extortion.

The officers' lawyers, T. Scott Jones and Craig L. Garrett, said such
roadside negotiations were common practice, not only in Loudon County but
also in Knox and Blount counties.

If so, Bartlett said, they're operating outside the law.

"There's no such thing" as a contribution in such instances, Bartlett said.
"This is exactly the problem we were trying to avoid."

Under state law, police agencies can seize property, including vehicles and
cash, they believe is connected to drug dealing. They can also seize
vehicles for certain alcohol-related incidents and other criminal violations.

The laws allow agencies to seize property even if no charges are filed. If
awarded the property, agencies can deposit cash or the proceeds from the
sale of property into their drug funds.

Agencies are supposed to obtain forfeiture warrants and submit them to the
Department of Safety within five days of a seizure. The agencies can
negotiate settlements, but the Department of Safety must sign off on any deal.

The Department of Safety has no record of Witt's case.

Jones and Garrett said circumventing the law allows suspects to get at
least a portion of their property returned without going through the red
tape of a legal process. They also save a $350 filing fee that goes to the
state.

Blount County Sheriff Jim Berrong confirmed that his office sidesteps the
state process. Loudon County Sheriff Tim Guider has referred all questions
about seizures to Jones and Garrett, while Knox County Sheriff Tim
Hutchison has not returned phone calls.

The Department of Safety doesn't have regulatory authority over the
agencies. The state's only oversight, Bartlett said, would come through
annual audits conducted in every jurisdiction.

After reading a newspaper account of the lawyers' statements, Bartlett
called the district attorneys general in Blount, Knox and Loudon counties.
None of them said they were aware of any backroom dealings, Bartlett said.

Bartlett said he believes defense attorneys would have to at least condone
such deals.

"For this to be routine, a defense attorney would have to know about it and
keep silent about it," Bartlett said. "That would be an ethical violation,
in my view."

However, several local lawyers said it would be easy to keep them in the
dark about roadside deals.

"Once they've reached their agreement on the side of the road, it's not
likely anybody would report that," Knoxville lawyer Mike Whalen said.

John Eldridge agreed, saying, "If it's extracurricular, odds are we
wouldn't know about it."

Though he declined to cite specific incidents, Don Bosch said he's
convinced roadside deals have occurred.

"I have certainly had experiences where I believed local law enforcement
didn't go through their proper channels as it relates to forfeiting a
client's property," Bosch said.

Steve Oberman said it's happened to a client of his only once during a
quarter-century practicing law. David Eldridge said he's run into similar
situations, but only on rare occasions several years ago.

On the other hand, several prominent defense lawyers - Jeff Whitt, Russ
Greene, Bo Reed, Dennis Francis, Greg Isaacs and Bruce Poston - said they
had never encountered an informal deal involving seized assets.

"That has never happened in my 24 years of practice," Reed said.

Some of the lawyers expressed frustration with the civil forfeiture
process, even when it's run correctly.

"It's legal extortion," Poston said. "It was meant to get the Yukon and the
Uzi and the million-dollar house. It wasn't meant to get Aunt Suzy."

"It's a joke," Whalen said. "It's extortion in the extreme."

Bartlett defended the Department of Safety process, saying the system works
and safeguards are in place for police officers and private citizens alike.

"That's why we have this paper trail," Bartlett said. "To protect everybody."