HB 331-FN - AS INTRODUCED
2021 SESSION
21-0409
08/10
HOUSE BILL 331-FN
AN ACT relative to a forfeiture of personal property.
SPONSORS: Rep. Sylvia, Belk. 6; Rep. T. Lekas, Hills. 37; Rep. Bean, Belk. 2; Rep. Greene,
Hills. 37; Rep. Aron, Sull. 7; Rep. Spillane, Rock. 2; Rep. A. Lekas, Hills. 37
COMMITTEE: Judiciary
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
ANALYSIS
This bill limits the conditions under which seized property may be transfered to a federal agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.
Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]
Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.
 HB 331-FN - AS INTRODUCED
21-0409
08/10
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Twenty One
AN ACT relative to a forfeiture of personal property.
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1 1 New Section; Forfeiture of Personal Property. Amend RSA 617 by inserting after section 12
2 the following new section:
3 617:13 Limiting Federal Forfeiture Litigation under Equitable Sharing to Seizures That Include
4 More than $100,000 in Currency.
5 I. No state, county or municipal law enforcement agency or prosecuting authority may enter
6 into an agreement to transfer or refer seized property to a federal agency directly, indirectly, by
7 adoption, through an intergovernmental joint task force or by other means for the purposes of
8 forfeiture litigation unless the seized property includes United States currency in excess of $100,000.
9 II. All state, county or municipal law enforcement agencies shall refer seized property to the
10 appropriate state, county or municipal prosecuting authority for forfeiture litigation under this
11 chapter unless the seized property includes United States currency in excess of $100,000. If seized
12 property includes United States currency in excess of $100,000, the state, county or municipal law
13 enforcement agency has the option but is not required to refer or transfer the seized property to a
14 federal agency for forfeiture litigation under federal law.
15 III. Nothing in paragraph I or II shall be construed to restrict state, county or municipal law
16 enforcement agencies from collaborating with a federal agency to seize contraband or property that
17 the law enforcement agency has probable cause to believe is the proceeds or instruments of a crime
18 through an intergovernmental joint task force.
19 2 New Section; Anti-Circumvention of State Forfeiture Jurisdiction. Amend RSA 318-B by
20 inserting after section 17-f the following new section:
21 318-B:17-g Limiting Federal Forfeiture Litigation under Equitable Sharing to Seizures That
22 Include More than $100,000 in Currency.
23 I. No state, county or municipal law enforcement agency or prosecuting authority may enter
24 into an agreement to transfer or refer seized property to a federal agency directly, indirectly, by
25 adoption, through an intergovernmental joint task force or by other means for the purposes of
26 forfeiture litigation unless the seized property includes United States currency in excess of $100,000.
27 II. All state, county or municipal law enforcement agencies shall refer seized property to the
28 appropriate state, county or municipal prosecuting authority for forfeiture litigation under this
29 chapter unless the seized property includes United States currency in excess of $100,000. If seized
30 property includes United States currency in excess of $100,000, the state, county or municipal law
 HB 331-FN - AS INTRODUCED
- Page 2 -
1 enforcement agency has the option but is not required to refer or transfer the seized property to a
2 federal agency for forfeiture litigation under federal law.
3 III. Nothing in paragraph I or II shall be construed to restrict state, county or municipal law
4 enforcement agencies from collaborating with a federal agency to seize contraband or property that
5 the law enforcement agency has probable cause to believe is the proceeds or instruments of a crime
6 through an intergovernmental joint task force.
7 3 Effective Date. This act shall take effect January 1, 2022.
 LBA
21-0409
12/15/20
HB 331-FN- FISCAL NOTE
AS INTRODUCED
AN ACT relative to a forfeiture of personal property.
FISCAL IMPACT: [ X ] State [ ] County [ X ] Local [ ] None
Estimated Increase / (Decrease)
STATE: FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024
Appropriation $0 $0 $0 $0
Revenue $0 Indeterminable Indeterminable Indeterminable
Expenditures $0 Indeterminable Indeterminable Indeterminable
Funding Source: [ X ] General [ ] Education [ ] Highway [ ] Other
LOCAL:
Revenue $0 Indeterminable Indeterminable Indeterminable
Expenditures $0 Indeterminable Indeterminable Indeterminable
METHODOLOGY:
This bill limits the conditions under which seized property may be transferred to a federal
agency. The Department of Justice indicates the bill prohibits state and local law enforcement
agencies from entering into agreements with the federal government to allow the federal
government to take custody of property valued at less than $100,000.00 for the purposes of
forfeiting that property pursuant to federal law. In the context of drug-related crimes, the
Attorney General’s Office handles all forfeiture proceedings. This bill would increase the
number of forfeiture proceedings the Attorney General’s Office must handle because state and
local law enforcement would no longer be able to work with the federal government to forfeit
money or property. It is not clear how many additional forfeiture cases this bill would create.
Therefore, this bill’s fiscal impact is indeterminable.
The New Hampshire Municipal Association states this legislation bars state, county, and
municipal law enforcement agencies from entering into agreements with federal agencies to
allow the federal government to engage in “adoptive forfeiture”; the process by which the federal
government brings a forfeiture case without being involved in building the case except where
$100,000 in U.S. currency is involved, and unless the seizure of the property took place under the
auspices of an intergovernmental joint task force. The Association indicates the bill would,
presumably, cut some portion of the incoming equitable share due to the restriction on how
 municipal law enforcement agency may turn over property to the federal government. The
impact on county revenue and expenditures cannot be determined.
AGENCIES CONTACTED:
Departments of Justice, Administrative Services and New Hampshire Municipal Association