Has anyone doing drug seizure cases seen this motion before. I have been doing them since 1994 and this is the first time. It was before the latest defense bar seminar. I am thinking of having the hearing just to see what happens, but I am also leaning towards my Motion for Protective order and put off the hearing till the criminal case is disposed. Any other thoughts or suggestions?

I have seen a variety of quasi-civil/criminal end arounds, but never that one. It sounds to me like the defense is trying to get two bites at the apple on some kind of suppression issue. My go to guy is Michael Williams at the El Paso task force. If it exists he's seen it.

I have not seen the Probable Cause Hearing route yet, but I have one where they have raised the Innocent Owner defense, then either refused or objected to my pertinent discovery - interrogatories, request for admissions etc. and then they moved for Summary Judgment saying that they have the Innocent Owner Defense as a matter of law. I am going to have to get my response in by next week and am debating about how to work the Motion to Compel into the mix of responding etc. I just thought it was rather ironic and possibly a good ploy on their part. They may think that they can bluff their way around us country bumpkin prosecutors.

If as stated in art. 59.05(b) all cases under Chapter 59 shall proceed to trial in the same manner as in other civil cases, then, aside from motions under Tex.R.Civ.P. 166a, how do you get the merits of the case before the trial court prior to trial? Whether the property was properly seized in accordance with art. 59.03 may constitute a defense to its forfeiture, but the case should not be tried piecemeal. See Gragg, 43 S.W.3d at 626.

Thanks Martin.