Man demands seized money Police say man waived right to redress; expert says document won't hold in court REBECCA BLUE and NATALIE NEYSA ALUND Herald Staff Writers BRADENTON - In July, Bradenton police confiscated $10,200 from Delane Johnson while responding to a robbery in the 1300 block of 19th Street East. Almost four months later, he wants the money back. Johnson recently filed a petition with the 12th Judicial Circuit Court in Manatee County challenging a contraband forfeiture agreement used by the police department in which suspects waive their right to have a judge review a confiscation. The written agreement includes no benefit to the suspect in return for signing the waiver. When officers responded to the robbery call, they encountered Johnson walking near the crime scene with the money in his pocket. Johnson consented to a search, according to a police report. He had no drugs or weapons on him, though large amounts of marijuana and cocaine were found nearby. An officer arrested Johnson for failing to report a business transaction exceeding $10,000. While Johnson was in custody, officers presented him with the forfeiture agreement. He signed it. The state attorney's office later dropped the charge, but police never returned Johnson's money. Johnson's attorney, Varinia Van Ness, called the department's forfeiture system an "abuse of power." "Those cops have guns, so it's armed highway robbery," she said. "People don't have the knowledge or money to fight a police agency." Van Ness said most don't understand the consequences of signing the agreement. "We're trying to get the court to establish the way they are taking people's money isn't correct and to make them follow the forfeiture law," Van Ness said. "We want the practice to stop. It's the agency's burden to prove it's drug money, and if they can't prove it, it can't be taken." Bradenton Police Chief Michael Radzilowski is confident the agreement the police department offers defendants will remain intact, even if it undergoes a judicial review. "It's unbelievable how many people sign away their property," Radzilowski said. "They just give it away." To Van Ness, it's not just unbelievable; it's also unfair. She petitioned the court to force the department to follow "proper" forfeiture procedures, she said. "We want for the people this happens to, to go over this with someone before they forfeit their things," Van Ness said. "When you enter a plea in court, if you don't want a lawyer, a judge makes sure you understand you're giving up a right to a lawyer. All of these things establish that a waiver is knowingly and voluntarily being made." A majority of the agreements come into play during drug-related arrests. "We're not taking innocent people's money," Radzilowski said. "The drug business is a dirty business. To be successful, we need to take the profit out of it by taking their property legally." No apologies The agreement allows the department to avoid the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, which often includes a court proceeding to determine whether the property should belong to the department or be returned to the suspect. The property, whether money, vehicle or other item, is what Radzilowski calls "fruits of a crime." "The person agrees to give up objects of property attained during a criminal enterprise," Radzilowski said. "If a drug dealer drives a $50,000 car, we're going to take it eventually anyways. This agreement saves everyone time and money." With the agreement, there's no court hearing, which means lawyers don't have to be hired and the property doesn't get tied up in the court system, he said. Any item the department receives under the agreement is deposited into a forfeiture fund so the city can have some oversight. "This way, 100 percent goes back into law enforcement and helps to continue the fight against narcotics in the streets," Radzilowski said. "If you're involved in an aggravated battery, we wouldn't take the car you drove because you drove it away from the scene. It's not a fruit of the crime. There's no profit. Bottom line is, if you're not dealing drugs and you don't have the results of drug money, we're not going to ask you to give it to us." And Radzilowski has no apologies about the agreement allowing the department to keep the property even if the arrest doesn't result in a conviction. "Just because the charges are dropped, that has nothing to do with the fruits of the crime," Radzilowski said. "If there's a technicality during an arrest and charges are dismissed, we're not going to give it back. This is a civil process and dropping of charges doesn't mean anything." Stetson University law professor Bruce Jacobs disagrees. "I don't think they should get away with this," Jacobs said. Jacobs, who has studied similar forfeiture laws regarding car dealers and the seizure of boats for maritime offenses such as possession of banned netting, said such laws apply only after a conviction. Other departments The Bradenton Police Department isn't the only agency in the state to use this kind of agreement. Police departments in Fort Pierce, Cocoa and Miami-Dade counties have similar procedures. "These departments have had very few challenges to this agreement," Radzilowski said. "Their attorneys say it's a solid process, separate from the forfeiture act." The Manatee County Sheriff's Office doesn't have the civil agreement and follows the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. The state law allows agencies to confiscate property such as money and vehicles that are connected to a narcotics transaction, according to a Forfeiture of Assets general order issued by the sheriff's office. "Most of the seizures are cash and money," said Major Keith Stewart of the sheriff's office. "If we're not sure if there's a connection between the property and the crime, we don't take it. And if we decide after taking it that it doesn't look like the item is involved in any way, we give it back." And if the suspect isn't convicted of the crime, the property is returned. The sheriff's office also gives the defendant the opportunity to request a hearing to get their property back. Anything collected by the office is used by the department or auctioned, Stewart said. 'Worthless piece of paper' Regardless, Radzilowski has halted the agreements until the department's attorneys, who wrote the agreement, make sure it will pass court muster. "I gave it to them to review Monday, but it's simply a common legal and binding civil agreement in practice with police departments around the state," Radzilowski said. Jacobs doesn't think the department's civil agreement will hold up in court, and has yet to find a statute that allows what the department is doing. "I think the contract is a worthless piece of paper," Jacob said. "The guy giving up his property - he's in a position where he has no freedom to say 'no,' he just has to go along with the police. A person who is about to be charged with a crime is not in a position to make up their mind. It's coercive and I don't think a contract of that kind could stand up, especially not under that kind of pressure. I don't think it means anything and a court will see through it." Radzilowski thinks "coercion" is just legalese. "Just like anything else, lawyers are always going to say their clients were coerced - that's their jobs," he said. "Most police departments are very professional and don't need to coerce anybody."
its just sanctioned robbery by extorsion .....shamefull crooks ....they print $ and tell everyone they should want it , then its illegal to walk around with it ....
An officer arrested Johnson for failing to report a business transaction exceeding $10,000. I do alot with cash, keep alot of cash. Fuck my last spec house I paid for every material drop in cash and got my profit from the sale in cash. Ive the proper forms and will include most when doing taxes but I dont think im required to stop and say "OH fuck we got to fill this out NOW" There is a time frame for reporting all of this to the irs and as far as I know or knew its a irs issue then a po po issue if so needed. We are so fucked and so controlled, there is a law to offset any other law and a law to offset those laws......we cannot win unless things change alot. A few years back I was backpackin across the country and was shook down here in ga and had about 5k in cash in my pack, the fucking pig tried to get me to answer his questions and I simply said its no crime to have cash and travel with a backpack. I was kept sitting in the back of the car for over an hour while they tried to figure out a way to fuck me, they couldnt. At least they went by the book and tried to fuck me vs just fucking me.
But yet we are suposed to live in a free and democratic country = NOT!. $10.000 this days is chump money . like having $3.000 in the 70s
