When federal agencies seize money or property during a drug investigation, they often use a program known as equitable sharing. Under this system, local police departments can partner with federal authorities and receive a portion of the seized assets. While the government promotes this as a tool for joint enforcement, the process can lead to serious abuses. Innocent property owners may find their assets taken without a conviction, and defendants often struggle to navigate the complex web of federal forfeiture laws.
Equitable sharing is a program managed by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury. It allows local law enforcement agencies to transfer seized property to federal authorities for forfeiture. After the federal government processes the forfeiture, a percentage—often up to 80 percent—is returned to the local agency.
This system creates a strong financial incentive for local police to participate in federal drug investigations. In many cases, agencies rely on forfeiture revenue to supplement their budgets. Unfortunately, this can encourage aggressive seizures that target property rather than proven criminal activity.
When a case is adopted by federal authorities, it bypasses state laws that might offer stronger protections. For example, some states require a criminal conviction before property can be forfeited. Federal law does not. Under federal statutes, the government can seize cash, vehicles, or even real estate based on suspicion that the property is connected to illegal drug activity.
Once seized, owners must act quickly to file a claim. Missing strict federal deadlines can result in losing the property automatically. These cases are civil in nature, meaning the government sues the property itself—often styled as United States v. $25,000 in U.S. Currency—and the owner must prove the money or assets were legitimate.
Defendants in federal drug cases face dual battles: the criminal prosecution and the civil forfeiture action. Even if the criminal charges are dismissed, the government can still pursue forfeiture under the lower “preponderance of the evidence” standard. This makes it possible to lose property even without a conviction.
When equitable sharing is involved, the case can become even more complicated. Local and federal agencies share information, resources, and proceeds, which can blur lines of accountability. Understanding which agency controls the property is the first step toward challenging the seizure.
Experienced defense counsel can use several strategies to contest an equitable sharing seizure:
A well-prepared attorney will also scrutinize the conduct of participating agencies. If local officers seized assets primarily for financial gain, that can raise due process concerns.
Federal forfeiture law is highly technical. Equitable sharing cases require navigating overlapping statutes, administrative rules, and procedural traps. At Glozman Law, our team has extensive experience defending clients in complex drug investigations and forfeiture actions. We understand how to hold the government to its burden and fight for the return of wrongfully seized property.
If your assets were taken through an equitable sharing seizure, do not wait. Contact Glozman Law today to discuss your options and begin building a strong defense.
Stay informed on federal and white collar defense trends from Glozman Law.