Legal Opinion

Limon v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 11, 1985No. 84-202PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

George Rose Smith, Justice.

The Controlled Substances Act was amended in 1981 to provide for the forfeiture of all moneys used or intended to be used to facilitate a violation of the Act. The amendment also provides that all moneys found “in close proximity” to forfeitable controlled substances or to forfeitable drug manufacturing or distributing paraphernalia are presumed to be forfeitable. The burden of proof to rebut the presumption is on the claimant to the property. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 82-2629 (a)(6) (Supp. 1983). Forfeitable property other than drugs includes equipment of any kind used or…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bozman v. Office of Fin., Balto. Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  2. Kirkland v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
  3. Bozman v. OFFICE OF FIN., BALTO. CTY.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  4. Morley v. Fifty Cases of WhiskeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
  5. Leach v. Cook, Commissioner of RevenuesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Jones v. STATE EX REL. MISSISSIPPI DPSMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Commonwealth v. HansonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  3. State Ex Rel. Cook v. SaynesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1986
  4. $15,956 in U.S. Currency v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  5. Neely v. State Ex Rel. Tate CountyMississippi Supreme Court · 1993

17 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