State of Indiana v. Tyson Timbs
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Slaughter, Justice.
The State sought to forfeit Defendant’s Land Rover after he used it to transport illegal drugs. The trial court held the proposed forfeiture would violate the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines' Clause. We conclude the Excessive Fines Clause does not bar the State from forfeiting Defendant’s vehicle because the United States Supreme Court has not held that the Clause applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Factual and Procedural History
Defendant, Tyson Timbs, used life-insurance proceeds after his father’s death to pay $42,058.30 for a Land Rover in. January…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Furman v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- District of Columbia v. HellerSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- McDonald v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Timbs v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
- State v. JohnsonMontana Supreme Court · 2018
- State of Indiana v. Ernesto RuizIndiana Supreme Court · 2019
- Timbs v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
- Katelin Eunjoo Seo v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.