People v. $20,110 US CURRENCY

60 Cal.Rptr.3d 554 (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 1022 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

$20,110 UNITED STATES CURRENCY, Defendant;

Ricky C. Hill, Defendant and Appellant.

No. B191821. Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Six.

June 4, 2007. As Modified June 28, 2007. [555] William G. Panzer, Oakland, for Defendant and Appellant.

Gerald T. Shea, District Attorney, Curtis A. Rankin, Deputy District Attorney, County of San Luis Obispo, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

GILBERT, P.J.

Health and Safety Code section 11488.4 is a civil forfeiture statute.[1] It allows authorities to seize assets related to criminal activities.

Inexplicably, the statute's requirements differ radically depending upon whether the value or sum seized is more or less than $25,000. Our opinion sheds no light on the reason for this distinction. The opinion will, we hope, explain why the forfeiture of $20,110 was not proper here.

Ricky C. Hill appeals a judgment of forfeiture of $20,110 currency found during execution of a search warrant in his residence. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On August 18, 2005, Hill filed a claim asserting an interest in $20,110 currency that was seized during a law enforcement search of his residence. On August 29, 2005, the district attorney filed a petition instituting a civil action for forfeiture of the currency pursuant to section 11488.4.

Pending the hearing, Hill filed a substitution of attorney form stating that his former attorney no longer represented him, and that he was representing himself.

The trial court held a hearing upon the matter on March 8 and 20, 2006. Neither [556]