CA7: Destruction or sale of seized property wasn’t unreasonable or a taking

Property lawfully seized by the city is destroyed or sold after a short while if unclaimed. That doesn’t make it an unreasonable seizure or a taking. Conyers v. City of Chicago, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 24676 (7th Cir. Aug. 18, 2021):

It is important to note at the outset that the City’s right to seize and inventory the property upon arrest is not at issue. It is well settled that it may do so. See Illinois v. Lafayette, 462 U.S. 640, 646 (1983). Likewise, plaintiffs do not contend that municipalities are not permitted to manage seized property. Their focus is instead on the policy the City has chosen for property owned by arrestees held at the Jail for more than the permitted 30-day period. As applied to that property, they contend, the City’s destroy-or-sell policy violates the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as Illinois law. While we can understand their frustration, however, we find no error in the district court’s decision that they have failed to state any claim on which relief can be granted. We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court.

This entry was posted in Privileges, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.