About this EventAdd to calendar
The State initiated this civil action seeking forfeiture of a Land Rover owned by Timbs, who pleaded guilty to felony dealing in a controlled substance and conspiracy to commit theft. The Grant Superior Court entered judgment for Timbs, concluding forfeiture of the vehicle would violate the Excessive Fines Clause of the United States Constitution. The Court of Appeals affirmed. State v. Timbs, 62 N.E.3d 472 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), vacated. The Indiana Supreme Court reversed, concluding, in part, that the United States Supreme Court had not held the Excessive Fines Clause applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. State v. Timbs, 84 N.E.3d 1179 (Ind. 2017), vacated. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and held the Excessive Fines Clause applies to the States. Timbs v. Indiana, -- U.S. --, 139 S. Ct. 682, 203 L. Ed.2d 11 (2019). On remand, the Indiana Supreme Court established a framework for determining whether a use-based in rem forfeiture violates the Excessive Fines Clause. State v. Timbs, 134 N.E.3d 12 (Ind. 2019). The case was returned to the Grant Superior Court to apply the framework, and that court again entered judgment for Timbs. The State has appealed.