Bennis v. Michigan

Infobox SCOTUS case
Litigants=Bennis v. Michigan
ArgueDate=November 29
ArgueYear=1995
DecideDate=March 4
DecideYear=1996
FullName=Tina B. Bennis v. Michigan
USVol=516
USPage=442
Citation=116 S. Ct. 994
Prior=Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Michigan
Subsequent=
Holding=The forfeiture order did not offend the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
SCOTUS=1994-2005
Majority=Rehnquist
JoinMajority=O'Connor, Scalia, Thomas, Ginsburg
Dissent=Stevens
JoinDissent=Souter, Breyer
Dissent2=Kennedy
LawsApplied=

"Bennis v. Michigan", 516 U.S. 442 (1996), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that innocent owner defense is not constitutionally mandated by Fourteenth Amendment Due Process in cases of civil forfeiture.

Tina B. Bennis was a joint owner, with her husband, of an automobile in which her husband engaged in sexual activity with a prostitute. In declaring the automobile forfeit as a public nuisance under Michigan's statutory abatement scheme, the trial court permitted no offset for petitioner's interest, notwithstanding her lack of knowledge of her husband's activity. The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed, but was in turn reversed by the State Supreme Court, which concluded, inter alia, that Michigan's failure to provide an innocent-owner defense was without federal constitutional consequence under this Court's decisions.

ee also

* List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 516

References

Further reading

*cite journal |last=Beatty |first=M. E. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1996 |month= |title="Bennis v. Michigan": The Supreme Court Clings to Precedent and Denies Innocent Owners a Defense to Forfeiture |journal=Mercer Law Review |volume=48 |issue= |pages=1265 |issn=0025987X |url= |accessdate= |quote=
*cite journal |last=Ingram |first=R. T. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1996 |month= |title=The Crime of Property: "Bennis v. Michigan" and the Excessive Fines Clause |journal=Denver University Law Review |volume=74 |issue= |pages=293 |issn=08839409 |url= |accessdate= |quote=
*cite book |chapter=Asset Forfeiture Without Due Process |title=The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom |last=Levy |first=Robert A. |authorlink=Robert A. Levy |coauthors=Mellor, William H. |year=2008 |publisher=Sentinel |location=New York |isbn=9781595230508 |pages=143–154

External links

* [http://www.enfacto.com/case/U.S./516/442/ Bennis v. Michigan, 516 U.S. 442 (1996)] (opinion full text).