Forfeiture

In a case appearing for the third time before the Indiana Supreme Court, which it described as “reminiscent of Captain Ahab’s chase of the white whale,” the court ruled that the forfeiture of a man’s Land Rover is unconstitutional because it is “grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the underlying dealing offense.”

INDIANAPOLIS — In a case appearing for the third time before the Indiana Supreme Court, which it described as “reminiscent of Captain Ahab’s chase of the white whale,” the court ruled that the forfeiture of a man’s Land Rover is unconstitutional because it is “grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the underlying dealing offense.”

Categories / Appeals, Criminal, Government

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Forfeiture

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Additional Reads