SB 2457: Property Forfeiture; Crime; Conviction Requirement

A BILL FOR AN ACT

RELATING TO PROPERTY FORFEITURE.

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

     SECTION 1.  The legislature finds that Act 288, Session Laws of Hawaii 2025 (Act 288), took important steps toward improving fairness and accountability in the State's property seizure and forfeiture processes, including allowing the forfeiture of property seized in relation to a crime only if the charge for a covered offense is filed within one year of the property seizure.  Nevertheless, the legislature recognizes that these forfeiture laws, as amended by Act 288, still do not require law enforcement to obtain a conviction for the covered offense before selling or disposing of the seized property.

     Accordingly, the purpose of this Act is to make property forfeiture under chapter 712A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, more just by restricting the forfeiture of property seized in relation to a crime to cases where the property owner has been convicted of the covered offense.

     SECTION 2.  Section 712A-5, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (3) to read as follows:

     "(3)  The following limitations shall apply to the forfeiture of property under this chapter; provided that nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prevent the seizure of property before conviction pursuant to section 712A-6:

    (a)   No property shall be forfeited under this chapter by reason of the commission of any covered offense unless the owner has received a charge for the covered offense.  If no such charge is filed within one year from the date of seizure, all property seized shall be returned to the legal owner, as determined by the department or agency in possession of the property, one year from the date of seizure; provided that property that is contraband or otherwise unlawful shall not be returned and shall be disposed of pursuant to rules adopted by the attorney general; provided further that if the legal owner cannot be determined or located, the department or agency in possession of the property shall follow procedures set forth in rules adopted by the attorney general to determine or locate the owner;

     (b)  No property shall be forfeited under this chapter by reason of any act or omission established by the owner to have been committed or omitted without the knowledge and consent of the owner;

     (c)  No conveyance used by any person as a common carrier in the transaction of a business as a common carrier shall be subject to forfeiture under this section unless it appears that the owner or other person in charge of the conveyance is a consenting party or privy to a violation of this chapter;

     (d)  No conveyance shall be subject to forfeiture under this section by reason of any act or omission established by the owner thereof to have been committed or omitted without the owner's knowledge or consent; [and]

     (e)  A forfeiture of a conveyance encumbered by a bona fide security interest shall be subject to the interest of the secured party if the secured party neither had knowledge of nor consented to the act or omission[.]; and

     (f)  No property shall be forfeited under this chapter unless the owner has been convicted of a covered offense by verdict or plea, including a no contest plea or a deferred acceptance of guilty plea or no contest plea."

     SECTION 3.  This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before its effective date.

     SECTION 4.  Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken.  New statutory material is underscored.

     SECTION 5.  This Act shall take effect upon its approval.

Report Title:

Property Forfeiture; Crime; Conviction Requirement

Description:

Amends forfeiture laws to require the owner of property seized in relation to a crime to be convicted of the covered offense before the property may be forfeited.

The summary description of legislation appearing on this page is for informational purposes only and is not legislation or evidence of legislative intent.

STAND. COM. REP. NO. 2469

Honolulu, Hawaii

RE:     S.B. No. 2457

Honorable Ronald D. Kouchi

President of the Senate

Thirty-Third State Legislature

Regular Session of 2026

State of Hawaii

Sir:

     Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred S.B. No. 2457 entitled:

"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO PROPERTY FORFEITURE,"

begs leave to report as follows:

     The purpose and intent of this measure is to amend forfeiture laws to require the owner of property seized in relation to a crime to be convicted of the covered offense before the property may be forfeited.

     Your Committee received testimony in support of this measure from the Office of the Public Defender, Community Alliance on Prisons, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, ACLU Hawaiʻi, Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, League of Women Voters of Hawaii, and two individuals.

     Your Committee received testimony in opposition to this measure from the Department of the Attorney General, Department of the Prosecuting Attorney of the City and County of Honolulu, Department of the Prosecuting Attorney of the County of Maui, and Honolulu Police Department.

     Your Committee received comments on this measure from one individual.

     Your Committee finds that civil forfeiture laws disproportionately affect low-income individuals who do not have the financial means or wherewithal to challenge seizures in court.  Additionally, civil forfeiture proceedings are subject to a lower standard of proof than criminal trials, meaning that property may be seized when it only has a tenuous connection to an alleged underlying offense.  Your Committee further finds that the State's forfeiture laws were recently amended to require a formal charge to be brought within one year of the asset seizure and if not, then the property would need to be returned to the owner.  However, once a charge is filed within the one-year time frame, the enforcement agency is then allowed to sell the asset seized and retain the proceeds without ever going to trial and obtaining a conviction against the owner.  This process of seizing private property then selling it and retaining the proceeds deprives the owner of due process and just compensation that are guaranteed and required under the United States Constitution when the government decides to take property.  This measure seeks to resolve this problem and inequitable situation by requiring the enforcement agency to obtain a conviction against the owner before the agency is allowed to sell the asset and retain the proceeds.  Further, this measure will strengthen due process protections for property owners and promote accountability and transparency in law enforcement's property seizure practices by requiring sufficient legal justification and tying property forfeiture to a criminal conviction.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Judiciary that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of S.B. No. 2457 and recommends that it pass Second Reading and be referred to your Committee on Ways and Means.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Judiciary,