In Re the Seizure of a 1988 Chevrolet Van

I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority. Briefly stated, the majority notes the existence of § 44-12-205(3), MCA, granting the district court broad discretionary authority, and then goes on to ignore it altogether. The majority does not attempt to construe the subsection either on a stand-alone basis, as part of the statute within which it is contained, or in relation to the other statutes comprising the Montana Forfeiture Act. This lack of analysis *184results in giving § 44-12-205(3), MCA, no effect whatsoever. I cannot agree.

Facts in addition to those set forth in the majority…