A federal circuit judge writes that Detroit’s vehicle seizure scheme
“is simply a money-making venture—one most often used to extort money from those who can least afford it.”
A panel of federal appellate judges ruled that Detroit’s practice of seizing people’s cars for months before allowing them to contest the seizure violates vehicle owners’ 14th Amendment right to due process.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, agreeing with a lower U.S. district court, found that Michigan’s Wayne County, which includes Detroit,
“violated that Constitution when it seized plaintiffs’ personal vehicles—which were vital to their transportation and livelihoods—with no timely process to contest the seizure.”
The 6th Circuit’s ruling mandates that Wayne County must conduct a court hearing for car owners post-seizure within a two-week timeframe.
Wayne County will probably spend two weeks looking for a loophole.
Legal Counsel and Your Rights
When facing legal challenges, particularly in criminal cases, it is advisable to seek legal counsel immediately.
An experienced attorney can provide guidance on how to navigate interactions with law enforcement while safeguarding your constitutional rights.
Since 1993 our expert legal defense in navigating criminal law matters and protecting your constitutional rights are what we eat for breakfast everyday.
Contact Komorn Law PLLC if you’re ready to fight and win.
Research us and then call us.
More Rights You Should Know
Michigan Crime Victim Compensation
Michigan has a crime victim compensation fund. You can contact them using the various links on this page. This post is just to provide you with information. We do not provide any services for this topic.Crime Victims Victims of crime often face lasting repercussions...
Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason
Long Lake Township v. Maxon The Costs Outweigh Benefits in Exclusionary Rule Application and the Slippery Slope of Fourth Amendment ProtectionsThe recent decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Long Lake Township v. Maxon represents a significant shift in the...
Other Articles
Supreme Court 8-1 Gun Possession Decision Changes Second Amendment
Supreme Court 8-1 Gun Possession Decision Changes Second Amendment Landscape Forever!Issue: Whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), the federal statute that prohibits a person from possessing a firearm if he has been convicted of “a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term...
Facial Recognition and Wrongful Arrests
Facial RecognitionHow Technology Can Lead to Mistaken-Identity Arrests Facial recognition technology has become increasingly prevalent in law enforcement, but its use raises critical questions about civil liberties and accuracy. One landmark case sheds light on the...
People v. Chandler Case: Protecting Fourth Amendment Rights
Court of Appeals of Michigan PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javarian CHANDLER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 368736 Decided: June 27, 2024Before: Borrello, P.J., and Swartzle and Young, JJ. Introduction In the People v. Chandler case, the Michigan...
What are Miranda Rights?
What are Miranda Rights?Miranda Rights, also known as the Miranda warning, are the rights given to people in the United States upon arrest. “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law…” These rights stem...
What is the Exclusionary Rule?
What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...
Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason
Long Lake Township v. Maxon The Costs Outweigh Benefits in Exclusionary Rule Application and the Slippery Slope of Fourth Amendment ProtectionsThe recent decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Long Lake Township v. Maxon represents a significant shift in the...
Supreme Court Opinion – Created federal agencies need judicial oversight
Summary of the Opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. RaimondoIn Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court addressed the enduring precedent set by Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which has shaped administrative law for...
MI Lawyer Weekly – Michigan’s Go To Lawyers for Cannabis Law
Please join us in congratulating our inaugural Michigan’s Go To Lawyer for cannabis law. Michael Komorn, Komorn Law, Farmington HillsMichigan Lawyers Weekly is pleased to announce the inaugural “Go To Lawyers” for cannabis law. Now in its fifth year, the “Go To...
