State (Confiscated) Gun Auction

[Scott M]

Check things out this Friday, Auction on Saturday September 18 starting at 11 a.m. in Zimmerman.

State Gun Auction

[deerminator]

I've always found the concept of the DNR taking your own property from you fascinating from a legal standpoint. Can anyone weigh in on what gives them the power to do this? I know, I know, it was used as part of an illegal act. But is there some law that says they have the right to sieze property as a result. If not, I'd love to see someone challenge the legality of this sometime. I'm all for harsh, severe fines and penalties for breaking the law but not taking someone's personal property. It's ridiculous

[joe806]

This issue has been challenged over and over again in the courts. I agree 100 percent with the forfeiture laws, and I personally think they should apply to even more offenses. If you can't take your game legally the law should continue to take away the tools used to commit that crime, vehicles, boats, firearms, etc. The same forfeiture laws apply to drug dealers, DWI offenders, and other serious felons; so I am in favor of taking any tool used by poachers out of their hands. If they want the item back they can buy it!!

Here is a link to some of the forfeiture laws http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/minnfort.pdf

[deerminator]

Interesting. I'll have to do some research on the challenges and how federal rules could trump Minnesota law. Again, I'm all for the stiffests of fines, penalties, jail time and revocation of hunting opportunities. But where will it end. Say someone stored their overlimit catch of fish at their house, does the DNR get to take their house because it was involved in the crime? According to this logic, they could. It would seem to me DNR officers have a lot of choice in what they can and cannot take the way the law is written. That's dangerous. So should a police officer be able to take my car if I was going 5 miles over the speed limit? I was speeding and breaking the law. Why not?

[joe806]

That is a good point and I respect your opinion. I understand what your saying and of course the state should not take away some ones dwelling because an over limit of fish (maybe seize the freezer;). There is however instances were the feds have siezed houses for certain crimes some of those happened right here in MN. If you get a chance to fully look over and read the State of MN statutes regarding civil forfeitures it may clear some things up.

Lukkason v. 1993 Chevrolet Extended Cab Pickup, 590 N.W.2d 803 (Minn.

App. 1999)

The case listed above will give you an idea on how the U.S supreme feels about MN forfeiture laws.I am not all about sticking it to the average guy, but for the serious poachers and other serious criminals lets take away any piece of equipment that may be used to victimize us or our families. As far as the police taking away our cars for speeding violations, I think the 125 dollar fine gets the point across. It did for me!!

[Ufatz]

Deerminator, calm thyself. State statutes regarding seizures have been well tested and mainly found solid. In AK we became weary of people from around the world swooping in and assuming we were too ignorant to have penalties for wanton violations so we spent some time adjusting statutes and regulations. Last case I remember was some whiz-bang bigshots from Chicago. We took their airplane, guns, all gear and drove them to the airport in their shirts and put them on a plane home. We used to have some dandy sales of boats, trucks, planes,and other transportation devices.

Europeans were the worst, but we ended up with some lovely $50,000 hand made rifles and shotguns so I always looked forward to seeing them arrive! Ha Ha!!

You can't play by the rules.....pay the price. No sympathy here. None.

[DTro]

wow, that's a lot of guns!

[mwal]

Years ago I went some Wisconsin DNR gun auctions in Spooner. Thought a guy could get a good deal. Wrong most of them went for retail and more. Some of them had been thrown out of moving vehicles loss of wear rust etc. If you go make sure you know the value of the firearms you are bidding on. I saw Coast to Coast mastermag .22 auto's that sold for $89 new go for $150. Ridiculous

MWal

[tracker x-2]

Thats what i was affraid of mwal anyone else ever been to this auction can you expect any deals or is overrated?

[MinDak Hunter]

I know this is a LONG post but here is a lot of info on the subject... red, bold or both means it's important.

When property is confiscated it is transferred from private to public use (sold in this case).

A seizure is the taking by law enforcement officers of potential evidence in a criminal case. The constitutional limitations on seizure are the same as for search. Thus, evidence seized without a search warrant or without "probable cause" to believe a crime has been committed and without time to get a search warrant, cannot be admitted in court, nor can evidence traced through the illegal seizure (sometimes returned to the offender).

House Research Department Revised: August 2000

Minnesota’s Forfeiture Laws Page 11

Forfeiture of Motor Vehicles and Boats Used to Commit Game and Fish

Offenses

Minnesota law authorizes conservation officers to seize and forfeit any property, motor vehicle, or boat used to commit certain violations of the game and fish laws.

For example, a conservation officer has the power at any reasonable time to inspect premises and motor vehicles requiring a license under the game and fish laws. The officer must seize unlawfully possessed firearms and must seize any items used to illegally take game if no owner of the items can be identified. These items are subject to an administrative forfeiture process, not a judicial one. The officer also may confiscate any wild animals, wild rice, prohibited harmful exotic species, or other aquatic vegetation that have been unlawfully taken or possessed as well as any equipment having a value under $1,000 that was used to commit the violation. Furthermore, conservation officers may seize and seek judicial forfeiture of any: equipment having a value of $1,000 or more that is used to take or transport wild animals, wild rice, or other aquatic vegetation unlawfully; motor vehicle used illegally to shine wild animals, to transport big game or fur-bearing animals that have been illegally taken or purchased, or to transport minnows illegally; and boat or motor used to net fish illegally on Lake of the Woods, Rainy Lake, Lake Superior,Namakan Lake, or Sand Point Lake.

The law outlines a confiscation and judicial forfeiture process applicable to persons convicted of these game and fish law violations. This process is similar to that contained in the general forfeiture law described in Part 1 for “designated offense” forfeitures, except that proceeds from

the sale of forfeited motor vehicles, boats, and motors are credited to the game and fish fund in the state treasury. Minn. Stat. §§ 97A.215 to 97A.225.

97A.215 INSPECTIONS.

Subdivision 1.Storage of wild animals.

(a) When an enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that wild animals possessed or stored in violation of the game and fish laws are present, the enforcement officer may enter and inspect any commercial cold storage warehouse, hotel, restaurant, ice house, locker plant, butcher shop, and other building used to store dressed meat, game, or fish, to determine whether wild animals are kept and stored in compliance with the game and fish laws.

( When an enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that wild animals taken or possessed in violation of the game and fish laws are present, the officer may:

(1) enter and inspect any place or vehicle; and

(2) open and inspect any package or container.

Subd. 2.Records.

An enforcement officer may inspect the relevant records of any person that the officer has probable cause to believe has violated the game and fish laws.

Subd. 3.Licensed activity.

An enforcement officer may, at reasonable times:

(1) enter and inspect the premises of an activity requiring a license under the game and fish laws; and

(2) stop and inspect a motor vehicle requiring a license under the game and fish laws.

97A.225 SEIZURE AND CONFISCATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND BOATS.

Subdivision 1.Seizure.

(a) An enforcement officer must seize all motor vehicles used to:

(1) shine wild animals in violation of section 97B.081, subdivision 1;

(2) transport big game animals illegally taken or fur-bearing animals illegally purchased; or

(3) transport minnows in violation of section 97C.501, 97C.515, or 97C.525.

( An enforcement officer must seize all boats and motors used in netting fish on Lake of the Woods, Rainy Lake, Lake Superior, Namakan Lake, and Sand Point Lake in violation of licensing or operating requirements of section 97A.475, subdivision 30, 97C.825, 97C.831, or 97C.835, or a rule of the commissioner relating to these provisions.

© An enforcement officer may seize all boats and motors with their trailers that are used to take, possess, or transport wild animals when the restitution value of the wild animals exceeds $500.

Subd. 2.Procedure for confiscation of property seized.

The enforcement officer must hold the seized property, subject to the order of the court having jurisdiction where the offense was committed. The property held is confiscated when:

(1) the commissioner complies with this section;

(2) the person from whom it was seized is convicted of the offense; and

(3) the conviction is not under appeal and the time period for appeal of the conviction has expired.

Subd. 3.Complaint against property.

The commissioner shall file with the court a separate complaint against the property held. The complaint must identify the property, describe its use in the violation, and specify the time and place of the violation. A copy of the complaint must be served upon the defendant or the owner of the property.

Subd. 4.Release of property after posting bond.

At any time after seizure of the property specified in this section, the property must be returned to the owner or person having the legal right to possession upon execution of a valid bond to the state with a corporate surety. The bond must be approved by a judge of the court of jurisdiction, conditioned to abide by an order and judgment of the court and to pay the full value of the property at the time of seizure. The bond must be for $100 or for a greater amount not more than twice the value of the property seized.

Subd. 5.Court order.

(a) If the person arrested is acquitted, the court shall dismiss the complaint against the property and:

(1) order it returned to the person legally entitled to it; and

(2) order the commissioner to reimburse the person for any seized or confiscated property that is sold, lost, or damaged.

( Upon conviction of the person, the court shall issue an order directed to any person that may have any right, title, or interest in, or lien upon, the seized property. The order must describe the property and state that it was seized and that a complaint against it has been filed. The order shall require a person claiming right, title, or interest in, or lien upon, the property to file with the court administrator an answer to the complaint, stating the claim, within ten days after the service of the order. The order shall contain a notice that if the person fails to file an answer within the time limit, the property may be ordered sold by the commissioner.

© The court order must be served upon any person known or believed to have any right, title, interest, or lien in the same manner as provided for service of a summons in a civil action, and upon unknown persons by publication, in the same manner as provided for publication of a summons in a civil action.

Subd. 6.Court ordered sale after no answer.

If an answer is not filed within the time provided in subdivision 5, the court administrator shall notify the court and the court shall order the commissioner to sell the property. The net proceeds of the sale shall be deposited in the state treasury and credited to the game and fish fund.

Subd. 7.Hearing after answer.

If an answer is filed within the time provided in subdivision 5, the court shall schedule a hearing within ten to 30 days after the time expired for filing the answer. The court, without a jury, shall determine whether any of the property was used in a violation specified in the complaint and whether the owner had knowledge or reason to believe that the property was being used, or intended to be used, in the violation. The court shall order the commissioner to sell the property that was unlawfully used with knowledge of the owner and to return to the owner property that was not unlawfully used with the knowledge of the owner. If the property is to be sold, the court shall determine the priority of liens against the property and whether the lienholders had knowledge that the property was being used or was intended to be used. Lienholders that had knowledge of the property's use in the violation are not to be paid. The court order must state the priority of the liens to be paid.

Subd. 8.Proceeds of sale.

After determining the expense of seizing, keeping, and selling the property, the commissioner must pay the liens from the proceeds according to the court order. The remaining proceeds shall be deposited in the state treasury and credited to the game and fish fund.

Subd. 9.Cancellation of security interests.

A sale under this section cancels all liens on and security interests in the property sold.

[RumRiverRat]

Thats what i was affraid of mwal anyone else ever been to this auction can you expect any deals or is overrated?

Overrated.

[Musky Buck]

My theory is if 90% of us are law abiding should we really care about the 10%'s personal property being confiscated, I'm tired of the illegals getting a slap on the wrist and no one knows but how many times or for how many years were some of these guys and gals getting away with breaking fishing and hunting laws etc. I agree it likely isn't a deterrant to confiscate, look at how many were willing to blatantly bait deer and still are, but tough luck, quit greedily stealing away "our" fish and animals and birds and you simply won't jeopardize losing your gear. It is simply that simple.

[HooknHorns]

Is there a reason that hundguns are not on the list? Is it due to the wait period or do they run them through to make sure it wasnt used in another crime.

[deerminator]

My point isn't that poachers shouldn't be punished or offered sympathy or made to "pay the price." My point is your personal property is your personal property you purchased through money you earned (hopefully). You should be made to pay a fine, restitution, jail time, revocation of your license, etc., but not hand over your property. It's not the gun or bow or truck, it's the concept behind the DNR being able to take it from you whether or not you're actually guilty or before they've proven or disproven it. And againi, where will it end, your house? Your property? Give an inch and they will take a mile in this day and age.

[MinDak Hunter]

"Give an inch and they will take a mile in this day and age."

Except that these laws have been around for 100 years...

[MinDak Hunter]

"it's the concept behind the DNR being able to take it from you whether or not you're actually guilty or before they've proven or disproven it."

That's called a seizure, when the officer takes it as evidence. The COURT orders the confiscation not the DNR. You need to educate yourself on criminal law and the rules of evidence, that's why I made that long post before so we all could educate ourselves.

A seizure is the taking by law enforcement officers of potential evidence in a criminal case. The constitutional limitations on seizure are the same as for search. Thus, evidence seized without a search warrant or without "probable cause" to believe a crime has been committed and without time to get a search warrant, cannot be admitted in court, nor can evidence traced through the illegal seizure (sometimes returned to the offender).

[CRAZYEYES]

Little odd they would hold this auction on hunting opener.

[deerminator]

I had educated myself by reading your post. My last post had nothing to do with the legality. I'm past that and understand it now. However, you don't have to agree with every law on the books, which is why I said I don't like the concept. You have to comply with the law if you don't want to go to jail, but you don't have to agree with it. And I don't on this one. Regardless of the length of time this law has been around, laws do occassionaly change if enough people disagree with them or they are found unjust or unconstitutional. Or you could always express your opinion with your feet by moving to another state without such a law, which is another great feature of this republic.

[Scott M]

Anybody go?

[skee0025]

My point isn't that poachers shouldn't be punished or offered sympathy or made to "pay the price." My point is your personal property is your personal property you purchased through money you earned (hopefully). You should be made to pay a fine, restitution, jail time, revocation of your license, etc., but not hand over your property. It's not the gun or bow or truck, it's the concept behind the DNR being able to take it from you whether or not you're actually guilty or before they've proven or disproven it.

Of course its taken and held before your proven guilty. Its all evidence that can be used in court to prove that a crime was committed and the person in question committed that crime, whats so hard to understand? If the person is found not guilty all the property is returned. Its the same with any crime. Do you think murderers get the guns they use to kill back or that vehicles and tools used in buglaries are returned to the burgalars after they get out of jail?

[deerminator]

murders = poachers? Apples to oranges. So a over-limit of sunnies means you can take a $20,000 boat and $35,000 truck from someone. Mmmmm. Sounds like a money-maker to me.

[skee0025]

murders = poachers? Apples to oranges. So a over-limit of sunnies means you can take a $20,000 boat and $35,000 truck from someone. Mmmmm. Sounds like a money-maker to me.

Not appple and oranges. To me its the same. There are conseqences for committing crimes. These are the laws in effect. dont go whinning if your stuff get taken because you broke the law. If you do "A" then the result will be "B". Its all out there. Claiming ignorance of the law is no excuse. "So a over-limit of sunnies means you can take a $20,000 boat and $35,000 truck from someone " If thats the law, dont go taking overlimits and you wont have a problem, If you do and get caught dont birch about it!

[mrklean]

i gotta agree with you, poachers get off way to easy it seems like plus they have a chance to buy back their own guns dont like that at all

[nonteepical]

so if an over limit of sunnies equates to having your truck taken, then the guy who steals the squeegee at the gas station deserves his truck taken? neither one is a $30,000 crime, or deserves a loss of a vehicle for a period of time and an impound fee to get it back. should be ticket, day in court, guilty/notguilty fine/nofine.

[skee0025]

I'm not going to argue about what the law should be. Mearly that if the current law states the penalty is "X" and you commit that crime and get caught and convicted dont gripe about it. I have no issues with a person having their property legally confiscated. Don't do the crime if you cant do the time. I have been hunting and fishing for 30 years, in many different states and countries from the Bearing Sea to the South Pacific and have yet to run afoul of the law in those areas, it's easy, follow the rules and you wont have to worry.