State v. Hammad
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtCurley, J.
Eyad H. Hammad appeals from a civil forfeiture order confiscating his automobile and from an order denying his motion for reconsideration. Hammad argues that the forfeiture action violated the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Although Hammad is correct that the forfeiture of his vehicle implicates the protections guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause, we conclude that, after applying the test set forth in State v. Seraphine, 266 Wis. 118, 62 N.W.2d 403 (1954), the civil forfeiture in this case did not violate the Eighth…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Austin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- United States v. UrserySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- State v. McManusWisconsin Supreme Court · 1989
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. BoydCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2000
- State v. BergquistCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2002
- Schultz v. SykesCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
- State v. One 2013, Toyota CorollaCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2015
- State v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2019