Seizure for Forfeiture of Real Estate

If law enforcement attempts to seize a home, land, or other forms of real estate for forfeiture, they must choose between a forfeiture proceeding under state or federal law. Under Florida Statute 893.12(2), a state or local law enforcement officer can attempt to seize for forfeiture the following types of property:

• any non-homestead property and any improvements on real estate which is used or intended to be used in any manner or part to commit or to facilitate the commission of a violation of Florida Statute 893.03(1) or (2); or
• real estate acquired with proceeds obtained in violation of Florida Statute 893.03(1) or (2).

Forfeitures of real estate differ from those described under Florida Statute 932.701, which is limited to the forfeiture of property that has been or is being used to facilitate the commission of a felony.

Under Florida Statute 893.12(2), non-homestead real property may be forfeited if it was used or intended to be used in violation of any drug law involving Schedule I or II drugs. As a general rule, homesteaded real property may not be forfeited in Florida.

Attorney for the Seizure for Forfeiture of Real Estate in Florida

Contact a civil asset forfeiture attorney in Tampa, FL, to discuss your case. Our main office is in downtown Tampa, FL. We have additional offices in Clearwater and New Port Richey, FL.

Our civil asset forfeiture attorneys can help you demand an adversarial preliminary hearing within 15 days of the seizure for forfeiture. We can also help you file a motion for the return of property.

The prohibition on “excessive fines” applied to state governments. Excessive forfeitures can damage officers’ relationships with residents while running counter to the community-oriented policing models adopted in a number of cities across the state of Florida.

When a federal law enforcement agency such as DEA or the FBI seizes real property under federal law, we can help you bypass the administrative proceedings for remission or mitigation by filing a claim to demand early judicial intervention or immediate court action.

We fight seizures and forfeitures of real estate in Tampa in Hillsborough, Brooksville in Hernando County, New Port Richey and Dade City in Pasco County, Bradenton in Manatee County, and Bartow in Pasco County, FL.

Call 813-250-0500.

Seizures for Real Estate for Forfeiture under Federal Law

Under the 2009 Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual published by the U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Defense, Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section, law enforcement officers should engage in pre-seizure planning questionnaires and documentation before seizure real estate for forfeiture.

For asset-specific net equity thresholds, guidelines set the minimum net equity levels that generally must be met, preferably before the property is seized and certainly before federal forfeiture actions are instituted.

Under these guidelines published by the DOJ’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section, the net equity values are intended to decrease the number of federal seizures of real estate, thereby enhancing case quality and expediting the processing of the cases that are initiated.

The thresholds are also intended to encourage state and local law enforcement agencies to use state forfeiture laws.

As a general matter, the minimum net equity requirements for residential and commercial real property and vacant land—minimum net equity must be at least $30,000 or 20 percent of the appraised value, whichever amount is greater.

No property with net equity of less than $30,000 should be identified for forfeiture, although individual districts may set higher thresholds to account for local real estate markets.

When it comes to the net equity thresholds for the seizure for forfeiture of real estate under federal law, the established minimum net equity threshold for commercial/residential real property and vacant land is at least 20 percent of the appraised value, but in no circumstance less than $30,000.

The 2019 Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual provides that “[n]o property with a net equity of less than $30,000 should be considered for forfeiture, and individual districts may set higher thresholds to account for local real estate markets.”

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) created an “Asset Forfeiture Handbook,” dated January 28, 2020, that explains ways to justify the seizure of real property for forfeiture as follows:

9.2 Real Property

There are two ways to justify the seizure of real property for forfeiture. In the first, the [Special Agents] SAs have probable cause to believe that a criminal used the property in the commission of a crime. This is facilitation. Examples are houses used to store narcotics or harbor illegal aliens.

The second way to justify forfeiture is to demonstrate that the criminal acquired the property with proceeds derived from his or her illegal activity. An example would be a condominium purchased using money acquired from illegal arms exports.

Proceeds are always proceeds; criminals may use proceeds to purchase real property or transfer proceeds into and out of various financial accounts, but they always remain proceeds. Some property may be used to facilitate crime and represent proceeds of illegal activity.

Although only one justification is necessary to proceed with the seizure and forfeiture, the [HSI Asset Identification and Removal Group] AIRG SA should gather and document evidence supporting both justifications when building the case. An [Assistant United States Attorney with the Department of Justice] AUSA, considering the merits of the forfeiture(s), may want to allege both justifications when prosecuting the case.

9.3 Facilitation

When a real property is to be seized for facilitation, the AIRG SA should determine the following:

A. If there are [confidential informants] CIs involved, whether or not they are willing to testify that the property was utilized to facilitate the criminal activity;

B. If there are no [confidential informants] CIs, whether or not contraband was found on the property during the execution of a warrant, a controlled delivery, a cold convoy, a surveillance, or a knock and talk; and

C. Whether the property was used as a meeting, planning, or staging location for criminal activity. Among many other factors, SAs may wish to consider whether a telephone located on the property was used to plan or discuss criminal activity, as evidenced by a Title III interception or telephone toll record analysis.

9.4 Proceeds

When the property is to be seized for proceeds, the AIRG SA should take the following investigative steps:

A. Determine whether the target has any legitimate jobs/employment that may represent legitimate income. If the target has been employed in any legitimate capacity, the AIRG SA should contact the appropriate state’s Department of Revenue to verify employment and salary.

B. Ascertain whether the criminal case SA, a CI, or other individuals associated with the target know of any other sources of income that the target may have (i.e., investments, wealthy family, inheritance, etc.).

C. Check public records to discover if there are any corporations or other businesses registered in the target’s and/or family member(s)’ name(s).

D. Query criminal history databases to learn whether or not the target has a criminal history. E. Complete financial queries in TECS and available databases.

F. Identify loads of contraband or illegal aliens attributable to the target, if furnished by the CI, and calculate the estimated amount of money the target would have received for smuggling the load.

G. Determine whether there are additional properties in the target’s name.

H. Interview past employers, acquaintances, neighbors, parole officers, SAs, relatives, etc., to determine the history/background of the individual.

I. Obtain mortgage applications, which may reveal valuable information regarding assets and liabilities as well as checking and savings accounts information.

J. Obtain income tax returns to help determine sources of reported or legitimate income (some means for obtaining income tax returns include ex parte orders, subpoenas to third-party record keepers, or from files discovered during the course of a search warrant; SAs may wish to consult with the appropriate AUSA or with the local Office of the Chief Counsel (OCC) prior to obtaining income tax records)….

12.10 Notice to Property Owners of Illegal Activity

When real property is being used as a facilitating property, a letter may be sent to the legal owner of the property to put him or her on notice that his or her property is being used to facilitate an illegal activity. The letter informs the owner that continued illegal use of the property makes the property subject to seizure and forfeiture.

The letter requests from the owner a response in writing as to the steps the owner is taking to eliminate and/or prevent the continued use of the property for illegal activity. If the illegal use of the property continues, this correspondence may be used in overcoming an “innocent owner” defense on the part of the property owner. SAs wishing to use such a letter should consult with the appropriate AUSA and OCC concerning the recommended format and language for the letter.

Procedures for the Seizure of Real Property under Florida Law

Most law enforcement agencies in Florida follow strict rules for seizing real estate for forfeiture.

Before any real property is seized, the agency must determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the real property was used in violation of, or acquired with proceeds obtained in violation of, Sections 932.701-705 of the Florida Statutes, known as the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, or Section 893.12, Florida Statutes.

If no probable cause is found, then no seizure can occur. On the other hand, if probable cause is found, the agency can consider the following factors before deciding to seize real property:

• whether the seizure is cost-effective or serves other law enforcement objectives;
• the impact of forfeiture on the public health, safety, and welfare, particularly if the land is environmentally
  sensitive;
• the impact of the forfeiture on any innocent owners, lien holders, or other persons not involved in
  criminal activity;
• the impact of forfeiture on targets of a criminal investigation;
• the cost of pre-seizure planning and maintenance of property pending final disposition;
• the potential for successful a forfeiture action that will be upheld by the court.

Under Florida law, the agency that is considering a forfeiture action against real estate should do the following:

• Consult with the agency’s attorney regarding the investigation, seizure, and management of the real property under consideration for seizure;
• Determine whether probable cause exists to support a real estate forfeiture and assess potential case difficulties;
• Determine the impact of the real estate seizure or forfeiture on:
  • any criminal case;
  • the subject of the criminal investigation;
  • any owner of the property, particularly an innocent owner;
  • any party with a legal interest in the property;
  • any underlying crime problem;
  • other people in the community;
  • the agency considering the seizure for forfeiture;
  • other agencies or organizations; and
  • environmentally sensitive or protected lands.
• Determine whether proposed real estate forfeiture is financially feasible based on the following factors:
  • the relative strength of the case
  • the value and equity of the property
  • the amount of the forfeiture proceeds due to the agency;
  • the amount of the forfeiture proceeds due to other agencies;
  • the current status of the deed, mortgage, or liens;
  • the condition of the property;
  • the local real estate market;
  • the property’s location;
  • the cost of security, maintenance, insurance, litigation, and property appraisals;
  • the cost of operating the business, if appropriate, taking into consideration whether illicit funds have been used to support the operation.

This article was last updated on Friday, January 24, 2025.