Legal Opinion

Guillen v. Contreras

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 9, 2010No. 82531-9PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChambers, J.

¶1 — Under Washington’s civil forfeiture statute, law enforcement has the power to seize cash, property, and vehicles used in, or purchased with the proceeds from, drug dealing. RCW 69.50.505. Property owners have the right to challenge such seizures and, if they “substantially prevail! ],” recover their costs and reasonable attorney fees. RCW 69.50.505(6). In this case, police seized a car and money that appeared to have been used in a drug transaction. The family challenged the seizure. The superior court issued a mixed judgment, ruling that the car and some of the money was not subject to…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. State Ex Rel. Carroll v. JunkerWashington Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Rozner v. City of BellevueWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Schmidt v. Cornerstone Investments, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Dreiling v. JainWashington Supreme Court · 2004

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Trujillo v. Northwest Trustee Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  2. City of Walla Walla v. $401,333.44Court of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  3. Assoc. Gen. Contractors of Wash. v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2024
  4. State v. MohamedCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
  5. Department of Revenue v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2015

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API