DWI seizure of my car.
Yeah I thought your plate in the photo looked like a Minnesota plate. I have a set of statutes in my office so if I remember tomorrow at work I will look up the law and see what it says.
If you have the statutes that are cited on the ticket it would be helpful to post them. You can look them up on line here:
https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/
to see what they say but sometime there are cross referncing statutes that come into play so it help to be familiar with them.
I think the statute for this particular case is 169A.63 and you can get you car back under this section of that law most likely:
(d) A motor vehicle is not subject to forfeiture under this section if its owner 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 the owner 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:
But I do not have time to look at it closely today, try me tomorrow. I am not sure the procedure but a quick look at the law (if I am reading it correctly) you may have to post some kind of bond to "bail your car out" of impound, and then show up in court, show that you did not know he was going to do this, and then you would get your money back. I will try to get a better reading of the law tomorrow. But at first glance if your cousin does not have a bunch of priors and you can show you are the title holder and it was a borrowed car, you should be entitled to get it back.
If you have the statutes that are cited on the ticket it would be helpful to post them. You can look them up on line here:
https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/
to see what they say but sometime there are cross referncing statutes that come into play so it help to be familiar with them.
I think the statute for this particular case is 169A.63 and you can get you car back under this section of that law most likely:
(d) A motor vehicle is not subject to forfeiture under this section if its owner 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 the owner 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:
But I do not have time to look at it closely today, try me tomorrow. I am not sure the procedure but a quick look at the law (if I am reading it correctly) you may have to post some kind of bond to "bail your car out" of impound, and then show up in court, show that you did not know he was going to do this, and then you would get your money back. I will try to get a better reading of the law tomorrow. But at first glance if your cousin does not have a bunch of priors and you can show you are the title holder and it was a borrowed car, you should be entitled to get it back.
From what I understand for California law, the car is impounded for 30 days regardless of ownership. You might be able to retrieve personal items from the car if the car itself is not under investigation. After the 30 days, the owner can pick it up and pay the fine. The fine is significantly lowered if the owner truly did not know the car would be used to commit a crime.
Did everyone completely write off the fact that its a DSM?
IMHO I would just leave that thing in there
JUST KIDDING!
I hope that you get everything resolved in a timely manner. That sucks bad dude :thuumbdn:
IMHO I would just leave that thing in there
JUST KIDDING!I hope that you get everything resolved in a timely manner. That sucks bad dude :thuumbdn:
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post








