HF 2704

as introduced - 89th Legislature (2015 - 2016) Posted on 05/17/2016 09:01am

A bill for an act
relating to public safety; modifying vehicle forfeiture provisions to include
more than one owner of a vehicle; amending Minnesota Statutes 2014, section
169A.63, subdivision 7.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1.

Minnesota Statutes 2014, section 169A.63, subdivision 7, is amended to read:

Subd. 7.

Limitations on vehicle forfeiture.

(a) A vehicle is presumed subject to
forfeiture under this section if:

(1) the driver is convicted of the designated offense upon which the forfeiture is based;

(2) the driver fails to appear for a scheduled court appearance with respect to the
designated offense charged and fails to voluntarily surrender within 48 hours after the
time required for appearance; or

(3) the driver's conduct results in a designated license revocation and the driver
fails to seek judicial review of the revocation in a timely manner as required by section
169A.53, subdivision 2, (petition for judicial review), or the license revocation is judicially
reviewed and sustained under section 169A.53, subdivision 2.

(b) A vehicle encumbered by a security interest perfected according to section
168A.17, subdivision 2, or subject to a lease that has a term of 180 days or more, is subject
to the interest of the secured party or lessor unless the party or lessor had knowledge of or
consented to the act upon which the forfeiture is based. However, when the proceeds of the
sale of a seized vehicle do not equal or exceed the outstanding loan balance, the appropriate
agency shall remit all proceeds of the sale to the secured party after deducting the agency's
costs for the seizure, tow, storage, forfeiture, and sale of the vehicle. If the sale of the
vehicle is conducted in a commercially reasonable manner consistent with the provisions
of section 336.9-610, the agency is not liable to the secured party for any amount owed on
the loan in excess of the sale proceeds. The validity and amount of a nonperfected security
interest must be established by its holder by clear and convincing evidence.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), the secured party's or lessor's interest in a vehicle
is not subject to forfeiture based solely on the secured party's or lessor's knowledge of
the act or omission upon which the forfeiture is based if the secured party or lessor
demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the party or lessor took reasonable
steps to terminate use of the vehicle by the offender.

(d) A motor vehicle is not subject to forfeiture under this section if new text begin any of new text end its deleted text begin owner
deleted text end new text begin owners new text end can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the owner did not have
actual or constructive knowledge that the vehicle would be used or operated in any manner
contrary to law or that the owner took reasonable steps to prevent use of the vehicle by the
offender. If the offender is a family or household member of new text begin any of new text end the deleted text begin owner deleted text end new text begin owners
petitioning the court new text end and has three or more prior impaired driving convictions, the owner
is presumed to know of any vehicle use by the offender that is contrary to law. "Vehicle
use contrary to law" includes, but is not limited to, violations of the following statutes:

(1) section 171.24 (violations; driving without valid license);

(2) section 169.791 (criminal penalty for failure to produce proof of insurance);

(3) section 171.09 (driving restrictions; authority, violations);

(4) section 169A.20 (driving while impaired);

(5) section 169A.33 (underage drinking and driving); and

(6) section 169A.35 (open bottle law).

new text begin EFFECTIVE DATE. new text end

new text begin This section is effective August 1, 2016, and applies to
forfeiture actions occurring on or after that date.
new text end