SEIZURES OF DRUG HOUSES AIM TO TURN THEM BACK INTO HOMES

But Critics Say The Laws Are Sweeping, Intrusive

The bungalow on Detroit's Blackstone Street isn't much to look at. The porch
roof sags, the shrubs are a wild tangle and the security bars over the
windows make it look like a jail.

But to Suzanne Purzycki, who lives across the street, it's a diamond in the
rough -- now that it's no longer a drug house.

"It'd be a great home for somebody with children, or a retired couple,"
Purzycki, 66, said last week. "It's just a nice, little, cozy, cute house.
We're looking forward to having a home owner there that is a nice, quiet,
law-abiding citizen like most of the people on this block."

Wayne County Prosecutor Michael Duggan shares Purzycki's hope.

That was why he went to court to obtain the title to the wood-frame house
and put it up for auction: minimum bid, $4,500. The prosecutor's office Web
site describes it as "the perfect starter home."

Since August, seven months after he took office, Duggan has moved to seize
more than 200 houses where drugs were bought, sold and used. So far, his
office has obtained the title to 33 of those homes, including the bungalow
on Blackstone, and sold 11 of them for prices ranging from $1,200 to
$56,000.

"We are going to make sure these houses go into the hands of law-abiding
families," he said. "We are going to do this over and over."

The federal government routinely seizes houses and other drug traffickers'
assets and sells them at auction. Duggan's crackdown targets lower-level
offenders who might otherwise escape federal attention.

Critics of civil forfeiture say the practice tramples on people's rights.

"The laws authorizing it are sweeping and intrusive," said Lawrence Reed,
president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a conservative
organization based in Midland. "The threshold of evidence required before an
asset is seized is so low that the law represents a significant threat to
the rights of all people, not just the guilty."

In civil cases, authorities need only to prove their case by a preponderance
of the evidence. That is less strict than the criminal standard, which
requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Because the authorities often get to keep the proceeds from assets they
seize, Reed said, "there is inordinate incentive for authorities to push the
forfeiture laws to their limits and beyond."

Bay County Prosecutor Joseph Sheeranh's office has seized and auctioned off
a half-dozen drug houses and used the proceeds to support a regional
antidrug law enforcement coalition. He conceded that forfeiture should not
be pursued "just for the sake of the money," but said it is a justifiable
weapon against chronic drug activity.

"People in neighborhoods get awfully tired of it when the police make an
arrest, the prosecutor prosecutes and the drug activity continues," he said.
"The homeowner-drug trafficker is entitled to his or her day in court." He
added, "If they're using the house for a drug supermarket, it only makes
sense to take the instrumentality of the crime out of their hands."