Practice Area: Criminal Defense and Civil Forfeiture
Attorney: Mark Nicholson
Result: Dealing Charge Dismissed, Probation, and Compensation for Seized Truck

The Situation

Our client was stopped while driving a truck in which police allegedly discovered marijuana. The State charged him with both possession of marijuana and dealing in marijuana. The government also seized his valuable truck and attempted to keep it through Indiana's civil-forfeiture laws.

The forfeiture created a separate legal battle. Even before the criminal case was resolved, our client faced permanently losing a valuable vehicle.

Our Strategy

Attorney Mark Nicholson challenged both the dealing allegation and the attempted forfeiture. In the criminal case, Attorney Nicholson negotiated the dismissal of the dealing charge. The client resolved the remaining possession charge without serving jail time and received probation.

Attorney Nicholson also represented the client in the forfeiture proceeding. The trial court ruled that the truck had to be returned to the client.

Despite the court's return order, the truck was sold. Attorney Nicholson responded by filing a motion asking the court to hold the responsible parties in contempt for selling the vehicle contrary to the court's order. He continued pursuing the matter through the appellate process.

The Result

The marijuana-dealing charge was dismissed, and the client received probation on the remaining possession charge.

In the forfeiture matter, the trial court ordered the seized truck returned. When the truck was instead sold, Attorney Nicholson pursued further legal action. Before the Indiana Court of Appeals issued its ruling, the matter was resolved and the client received money compensating him for the truck.

Why This Case Matters

Civil forfeiture can deprive someone of valuable property even before the related criminal case has been fully resolved. Property owners have the right to challenge a seizure and require the government to establish a lawful basis for keeping their property.

This case also demonstrates that a court order cannot simply be disregarded. When the client's truck was sold despite an order requiring its return, Attorney Nicholson continued fighting until the client received compensation for his loss.