Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Hruz finds the circuit court properly denied the state's motion to dismiss a civil forfeiture action brought against the citizen seeking seizure of a pole barn and other real estate he allegedly used to sell drugs. Contrary to the argument that the circuit court lost competency to handle the forfeiture action because it did not hold a hearing within 60 days of the citizen's answer to the state's complaint, the relevant statute automatically adjourns forfeiture actions until after a defendant is convicted of a crime related to the basis for the seizure of property. Therefore, the 60-day hearing deadline in the statutes cannot reasonably begin until after such a conviction, and that deadline had not begun for the citizen because he had not been convicted of any of the underlying drug felonies related to the seizure as plea negotiations were ongoing. Affirmed.