FORFEITURE OF 2006 SATURN ION
Michigan Supreme Court Ruling – July 25, 2025
The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that Detroit police can no longer seize cars through civil asset forfeiture unless they can demonstrate that the vehicle was used for drug trafficking.
The court ruled that Stephanie Wilson’s 2006 Saturn Ion was not subject to forfeiture laws as there was no evidence of drug-related activities when seized in 2019. Mere proximity to suspected drug crimes or passenger drug possession is not sufficient for seizure.
Michigan Supreme Court: Factual and Procedural History
On June 24, 2019, claimant Stephanie Wilson was driving in the defendant vehicle with Malcolm Smith in the passenger seat when she was pulled over by Sergeant Chivas Rivers of the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office. Sergeant Rivers testified at his deposition that he had been surveilling a house on Lumley Street in Detroit for narcotics activity when he saw claimant and Smith drive up and park in front of that house. An unidentified man approached the passenger side of the defendant vehicle and reached his arm in through the window for what Sergeant Rivers believed to be a hand-to-hand drug transaction.
After claimant drove away, Sergeant Rivers followed the defendant vehicle a short distance before effectuating a traffic stop on the basis of a failure to signal a turn. Sergeant Rivers
testified that, when he pulled claimant over, she stated that she had driven Smith to the Lumley Street address to purchase drugs. Claimant has denied saying this.
After speaking to claimant and Smith, Sergeant Rivers searched the defendant vehicle and found five empty syringes under the passenger seat but no other evidence of drugs. Although Sergeant Rivers averred that Smith stated that he had already used the syringes to inject heroin, it appears that the syringes were never tested for drug residue. Sergeant Rivers seized the
defendant vehicle. Nearly four months later, the state initiated forfeiture proceedings pursuant to MCL 333.7521.
Following discovery, claimant moved for summary disposition on three bases:
(1) MCR 2.116(C)(7) (plaintiff failed to promptly file its complaint for forfeiture);
(2) MCR 2.116(C)(8) (plaintiff failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted); and
(3) MCR 2.116(C)(10) (there was no material factual dispute, and claimant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law).
The trial court held a hearing and considered arguments from both parties regarding the facts surrounding the seizure of the defendant vehicle.
Finding that Sergeant Rivers appeared to have witnessed a hand-to-hand transaction but that such an interaction would not necessarily involve drugs, the trial court granted summary disposition to claimant without explicitly specifying the ground on which the ruling was based.
Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, a motion to stay, and an ex parte motion for relief from judgment.
The trial court denied these motions and directed plaintiff to release claimant’s vehicle immediately.
Read the Entire Opinion Here
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
![The 6th Amendment – Do You Know What It Is?](https://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/The-6th-Amendment-What-is-it.jpg)
The 6th Amendment – Do You Know What It Is?
The 6th Amendment: is it still a thing?The 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution is a crucial pillar of the Bill of Rights, designed to ensure fair and just legal proceedings for individuals accused of crimes. Ratified on December 15, 1791, this amendment...
![4th Circuit says – Assault weapons can be banned](https://komornlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Rich-protected-politicians-making-poor-choices-1.jpg)
4th Circuit says – Assault weapons can be banned
This case is about whether the Act’s general prohibition on the sale and possession of certain “assault weapons,” are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. An en banc federal appeals court upheld Maryland’s ban on assault-style weapons in a 10-5 decision...
Other Articles
The Michigan Supreme Court, Local Control and Medical Marijuana
Do cities and townships have the ability to restrict where caregivers grow medical marijuana? Over the course of the legalization of Medical and Recreational marijuana many have debated about whether control over dispensaries should be at the local or state level....
Michigan Supreme Court amendment delays the implementation of a rule amendment
The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order that delays the implementation of a rule amendment that would have impacted law firm advertising. On Aug. 30, 2018 the court stated that it would defer the amendment of MRPC Rule 7.2 that was scheduled to take effect Sept. 1...
The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled they have the right to ban guns
July 27, 2018 - The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the Ann Arbor and Clio school districts have a right to ban guns from their schools In a very much watched case that deals a blow to gun rights advocates who argued state law prohibits schools from...
Michigan Supreme Court overturns decision in case it heard at Detroit’s Cass Tech
The Michigan Supreme Court has reversed a state appeals court decision, issuing a ruling Wednesday that a single photo identification of a man suspected of robbing and shooting another man at gunpoint in Detroit wasn't sufficient. It's a case that was argued...
MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT – Sentencing Guidelines Unconstitutional
LANSING, MI 7/30/15 — In a decision that could have a far-reaching impact on current and future cases going through the court system, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the state’s sentencing guidelines that mandate prison terms are unconstitutional, and...
Michigan Supreme Court rules driving with any presence of marijuana protected by the MMMA
Michigan Supreme Court ruling on driving with presence of marijuana is a major MMMA break through. By Michael Komorn Rodney Lee Koon was charged in the 86th District Court with operating a motor vehicle with any amount of a schedule 1 controlled substance in his body....