What is the difference between civil and criminal forfeiture?

In California, there is an important distinction between civil and criminal forfeiture when it comes to white collar crimes law. Criminal forfeiture is the process of taking away property that was used to commit or facilitate the crime and is a penalty imposed upon an individual for committing a crime, such as fraud or embezzlement. Conversely, civil forfeiture is the process of taking away property obtained illegally through proceeds of crime, such as money laundering. The key difference between criminal forfeiture and civil forfeiture is the burden of proof. In criminal forfeiture, prosecutors have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime and that the property in question was used in the commission of the crime. In contrast, civil forfeiture only requires prosecutors to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the property in question was connected to a white collar crime. Because the burden of proof is less onerous in civil forfeiture compared to criminal forfeiture, it is easier for prosecutors to use civil forfeiture to seize property that is connected to a crime. Both criminal forfeiture and civil forfeiture are important tools for law enforcement in order to combat and punish white collar crimes, but the differences between them need to be understood.

Related FAQs

What is the penalty for perjury?
What is identity theft?
What is asset forfeiture?
How is organized crime related to white collar crime?
How is a criminal interdiction used to investigate white collar crime?
What are the consequences for tax evasion?
What is the difference between private and public fraud?
How do international laws affect white collar crime?
How is computer fraud committed?
How is restitution used in white collar crime cases?

What is the difference between civil and criminal forfeiture?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts