Upon the judgment of the Superior Court, the vehicle so seized and all of the rights, title and interest therein, or any right, title or interest in and to any such motor vehicle, as the Court determines, shall be forfeited to the State and the vehicle shall be committed to the custody of the Department of Safety and Homeland Security, Division of State Police for its use. If the Department of Safety and Homeland Security, Division of State Police determines that such seized vehicle is not suitable for its purposes, custody will be transferred to the State Treasurer, who may allocate the same to and for the use of any other state bureau, department, agency or officer or may sell the same and deposit the proceeds into the Special Law Enforcement Assistance Fund.
42 Del. Laws, c. 144,
§
4;
11 Del. C. 1953,
§
2324;
63 Del. Laws, c. 140,
§
2;
65 Del. Laws, c. 87,
§
172;
74 Del. Laws, c. 110,
§
138;
Notes of Decisions
State v. One 1984 Toyota Truck, 533 A.2d 659 (Md. 1987).
· cites it 2× “1973), involved what was then 11 Del.C. § 2325: "This subchapter with respect to .”
State v. One 1968 Buick Electra Delaware Reg. 43003, 301 A.2d 297 (Del. Super. Ct. 1973).
· cites it 2× “§ 2322 should not be permitted because she falls within the meaning of the exclusionary language in 11 Del.C. § 2325, since she is an owner and did not knowingly use or permit the vehicle to be used in, or in connection with, any violation of the laws relating to narcotic drugs.”
State v. Allen-Anderson, No. N16A-06-007 ALR (Del. Super. Ct. May 2, 2017).
“”40 In making this determination, the Delaware Supreme Court has authorized this Court “to consider other relevant factors in addition to those that are related to the claimant‟s injury, including the claimant‟s age, education, general background, occupational and general…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.