Civil Asset Forfeiture by State
Civil Asset Forfeiture by State
Ranking - Law
Maine and New Mexico remain the clearest green states because they use criminal forfeiture only and do not route proceeds back to police. Massachusetts and Alabama sit at the red end because they do not require a conviction in the core forfeiture path and let law enforcement keep up to 100% of proceeds.
Quick Answer
Civil Asset Forfeiture by State
-
1
Civil asset forfeiture protection is strongest in Maine and New Mexico, where conviction is required and police share is 0%.
-
2
Missouri and North Carolina are the next strongest outliers. Both send proceeds to schools, and Missouri requires conviction of the owner even when forfeiture is uncontested.
-
3
Massachusetts and Alabama sit at the red extreme. Massachusetts uses probable cause and 100%, while Alabama uses preponderance of the evidence and 100%.
Map
Civil Asset Forfeiture Protection Map
| State | Presumption of Innocence Protection |
|---|---|
| Alabama | Policing for Profit |
| Alaska | Policing for Profit |
| Arizona | Policing for Profit |
| Arkansas | Policing for Profit |
| California | Policing for Profit |
| Colorado | Policing for Profit |
| Connecticut | Policing for Profit |
| Delaware | Policing for Profit |
| Florida | Policing for Profit |
| Georgia | Policing for Profit |
| Hawaii | Policing for Profit |
| Idaho | Policing for Profit |
| Illinois | Policing for Profit |
| Indiana | Policing for Profit |
| Iowa | Policing for Profit |
| Kansas | Policing for Profit |
| Kentucky | Policing for Profit |
| Louisiana | Policing for Profit |
| Maine | Protected |
| Maryland | Mixed |
| Massachusetts | Policing for Profit |
| Michigan | Policing for Profit |
| Minnesota | Policing for Profit |
| Mississippi | Policing for Profit |
| Missouri | Protected |
| Montana | Mixed |
| Nebraska | Mixed |
| Nevada | Policing for Profit |
| New Hampshire | Policing for Profit |
| New Jersey | Policing for Profit |
| New Mexico | Protected |
| New York | Policing for Profit |
| North Carolina | Protected |
| North Dakota | Policing for Profit |
| Ohio | Policing for Profit |
| Oklahoma | Policing for Profit |
| Oregon | Policing for Profit |
| Pennsylvania | Policing for Profit |
| Rhode Island | Policing for Profit |
| South Carolina | Policing for Profit |
| South Dakota | Policing for Profit |
| Tennessee | Policing for Profit |
| Texas | Policing for Profit |
| Utah | Policing for Profit |
| Vermont | Mixed |
| Virginia | Policing for Profit |
| Washington | Policing for Profit |
| West Virginia | Policing for Profit |
| Wisconsin | Mixed |
| Wyoming | Policing for Profit |
Maine and New Mexico are the clearest green states because both require criminal forfeiture only and send proceeds away from police. Massachusetts and Alabama anchor the red end because neither has a core conviction requirement and both allow law enforcement to keep up to 100%.
Civil Asset Forfeiture by State Table
50 entries
No matching entries
Adjust the filter to show more entries.
|
State
|
Label
|
IJ Grade
|
Court Conviction Required
|
Police Share
|
Standard
|
Notes
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Alabama
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Alaska
|
Policing for Profit | D+ | No | 100 | Once the government seizes property, the owner must prove by preponderance of the evidence that it is not connected to a crime. | |
|
Arizona
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Moderate conviction provision requires conviction of the owner, but not if forfeiture is uncontested. Once the conviction provision is satisfied, prosecutors must show that the property is subject to forfeiture by clear and convincing evidence. | |
|
Arkansas
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Weak conviction provision falls short of criminal forfeiture. It does not require conviction of the owner, only of the person from whom the property was seized, and the court can waive the provision. | |
|
California
|
Policing for Profit | C | No | 76 | California has a weak conviction provision that applies only in limited contested cases. For uncontested forfeitures, the government can still move on a very low standard. | |
|
Colorado
|
Policing for Profit | C | No | 75 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Connecticut
|
Policing for Profit | C | No | 69.5 | Connecticut has a moderate conviction provision in some case types, but not a clean conviction-first rule across the board. | |
|
Delaware
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. A charge is required, but no conviction is required. | |
|
Florida
|
Policing for Profit | C | No | 75 | Prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Georgia
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Hawaii
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Idaho
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Illinois
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 90 | Illinois generally uses a preponderance standard, with a higher standard only in some related criminal-case outcomes. | |
|
Indiana
|
Policing for Profit | D | No | 93 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Iowa
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Iowa has a weak conviction provision that applies only in limited contested cases and not to property above certain values. | |
|
Kansas
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Kentucky
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Kentucky uses an unusually low traceability standard for most property and still lets owners bear heavy litigation risk. | |
|
Louisiana
|
Policing for Profit | D+ | No | 80 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Maine
|
Protected | A | Yes | 0 | Maine has only criminal forfeiture. | |
|
Maryland
|
Mixed | B+ | No | 0 | Maryland generally uses clear and convincing evidence and sends proceeds to the general fund, but it does not require a broad conviction-first rule. | |
|
Massachusetts
|
Policing for Profit | F | No | 100 | The government must only show probable cause that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Michigan
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Michigan has a weak conviction provision that applies only in limited contested cases and not to all property. | |
|
Minnesota
|
Policing for Profit | D | No | 100 | Minnesota has a weak conviction provision, but owners still have to fight to trigger it in many cases. | |
|
Mississippi
|
Policing for Profit | C- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Missouri
|
Protected | B+ | Yes | 0 | Missouri requires conviction of the owner even if forfeiture is uncontested, then links the property to the crime by preponderance of the evidence. | |
|
Montana
|
Mixed | D- | Yes | 100 | Montana has only criminal forfeiture. | |
|
Nebraska
|
Mixed | C- | No | 50 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. IJ says a prior reform was read too broadly because a loophole still allows most civil forfeitures to continue. | |
|
Nevada
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
New Hampshire
|
Policing for Profit | D | No | 90 | New Hampshire's conviction rule is weak enough that owners still carry the burden to prove innocence in practice. | |
|
New Jersey
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | New Jersey has only a narrow low-value conviction provision for some contested cases and otherwise allows civil forfeiture to proceed. | |
|
New Mexico
|
Protected | A | Yes | 0 | New Mexico has only criminal forfeiture. | |
|
New York
|
Policing for Profit | C | No | 60 | New York uses a tougher standard in drug cases, but only a very weak conviction provision outside them. | |
|
North Carolina
|
Protected | B+ | Yes | 0 | In general, North Carolina has only criminal forfeiture. Civil forfeiture remains available in racketeering cases. | |
|
North Dakota
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | North Dakota has a weak conviction provision that disappears if the owner does not contest or takes certain deals. | |
|
Ohio
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Oklahoma
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Oregon
|
Policing for Profit | C | No | 52.5 | Oregon has a weak conviction provision that applies only in contested cases and still lets civil forfeiture move without a clean conviction-first rule. | |
|
Pennsylvania
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Rhode Island
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 90 | Once the government seizes property, the owner must prove by preponderance of the evidence that it is not connected to a crime. | |
|
South Carolina
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 95 | Once the government seizes property, the owner must prove by preponderance of the evidence that it is not connected to a crime. | |
|
South Dakota
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Tennessee
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Texas
|
Policing for Profit | D+ | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Utah
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Vermont
|
Mixed | C- | No | 45 | Vermont has a weak conviction provision, but the police share is lower than in most states. | |
|
Virginia
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Virginia has a weak conviction provision that applies only in contested cases and does not require conviction of the owner. | |
|
Washington
|
Policing for Profit | D+ | No | 90 | Prosecutors must provide clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime, but no broad conviction-first rule applies. | |
|
West Virginia
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must prove by preponderance of the evidence that property is connected to a crime. | |
|
Wisconsin
|
Mixed | A- | No | 0 | Wisconsin has a weak conviction provision, but proceeds go to schools and not directly to police. | |
|
Wyoming
|
Policing for Profit | D- | No | 100 | Prosecutors must provide clear and convincing evidence that property is connected to a crime. |
No matching entries
Adjust the filter to show more entries.
Download as PDF
Print-ready table — Civil Asset Forfeiture by State
Civil Asset Forfeiture at a Glance
New Mexico and Maine show the cleanest anti-forfeiture model on this map. Nebraska shows why older rankings can age badly, and Massachusetts shows what the red end looks like when both the burden of proof and the profit incentive favor the government.
New Mexico
New Mexico is one of the two clearest green states on this page. IJ says New Mexico has only criminal forfeiture and no profit incentive because proceeds go to the general fund after related expenses.
That means the state does not let police permanently take property through the ordinary civil-forfeiture path. For a page centered on presumption-of-innocence protection, that is the strongest design.
Maine
Maine lands beside New Mexico in the top tier. IJ again says Maine has only criminal forfeiture, and proceeds are supposed to go to the general fund unless a different transfer is specifically approved.
Maine also reworked its system in 2021 to abolish civil forfeiture and replace it with criminal forfeiture. That is why Maine belongs in green, not yellow.
Nebraska
Nebraska is the most important correction on this page. It is not one of the clean green states in IJ's current edition.
IJ says the prior edition reported Nebraska had only criminal forfeiture, but a loophole in the reform allowed most civil forfeitures to continue. Nebraska now sits in Mixed on this map, with no broad conviction requirement and a 50% law-enforcement share.
Massachusetts
Massachusetts is the strongest red example on the page. IJ gives it an F, says the government needs only probable cause, and says law enforcement can keep up to 100% of forfeiture proceeds.
That combination is why Massachusetts is a cleaner symbol of policing for profit than a state that at least routes proceeds to schools or the general fund.
States That Banned Civil Forfeiture
Maine and New Mexico are the two clearest states that ended ordinary civil forfeiture and moved to criminal forfeiture only. Missouri and most North Carolina cases also belong in the strongest-protection cluster because both send proceeds to schools and rely on conviction-first rules in the core path.
Wisconsin and Maryland are different. Both route proceeds away from police, which is a real safeguard, but neither gives the clean conviction-first structure that Maine and New Mexico do. Nebraska and Montana split the other way. Nebraska uses clear and convincing evidence with a 50% police share, while Montana uses criminal forfeiture only but still allows up to 100% to flow back to law enforcement.
States with 100 Percent Civil Forfeiture Proceeds
Massachusetts, Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Nevada, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia, and many others still let law enforcement keep up to 100% of proceeds under state law. Those states dominate the red category because the financial incentive remains direct and obvious.
Some states look slightly better only because the police share is a bit below 100%. California is 76%, Florida is 75%, New York is 60%, and Oregon is 52.5%. None of those numbers are small enough to move them out of Policing for Profit on this map.
Quick Answers
Which states banned civil asset forfeiture?
What are the civil asset forfeiture laws in Massachusetts?
What are the civil asset forfeiture laws in Alabama?
Does Nebraska require a criminal conviction for civil forfeiture?
Which states send civil forfeiture money to schools?
Can police keep 100 percent of civil forfeiture proceeds?
Methodology
This page uses the Institute for Justice report Policing for Profit 4 and its state profiles, released in March 2026. IJ says the profile language reflects each state's forfeiture laws as of May 7, 2025, and this map groups states by whether the core forfeiture path requires a conviction and how much of the proceeds can flow back to law enforcement.
Sources
- Institute for Justice. Policing for Profit 4
- Institute for Justice. New Mexico State Profile
- Institute for Justice. Maine State Profile
- Institute for Justice. Nebraska State Profile
- Institute for Justice. Massachusetts State Profile
- Institute for Justice. Alabama State Profile
You Might Also Like
Serial Killers by State
Alaska has the highest serial killer rate at 0.867 per 100,000 residents. Hawaii is lowest, and California has the highest raw count at 128.
Flag of Arkansas
Arkansas had no state flag until 1913. Its white diamond marks the only diamond-producing state. A fourth star marks Confederate membership.
Flag of Arizona
Arizona's flag was sketched on an envelope in 1910 for a rifle team. Adopted in 1917, it became law without the governor's signature.
Flag of Alaska
Benny Benson designed Alaska's flag at 13. Eight gold stars on navy blue, the Big Dipper pointing to Polaris, adopted in 1927 and kept at statehood.
Alabama State Flag
Alabama's crimson cross on white was adopted in 1895, likely modeled after the Confederate Battle Flag. The state's first flag was destroyed by a storm one month after raising.
Flag of California
Brown grizzly on white, adopted in 1911, traces to settler William Todd's handmade flag raised at Sonoma on June 14, 1846.
Rainwater Harvesting Laws by State
Rainwater harvesting is legal in all 50 states. Colorado caps residential storage at 110 gallons, while Utah allows up to 2,500 gallons.
Weird Laws in Arkansas
Weird laws in Arkansas include a repealed statewide tattoo ban, a 145-year-old pronunciation law, and a Sunday car sales rule that is still enforced today.