We have a seizure action presently ongoing. The question is if we can prove criminal activity under Chapter 59 was actively conducted on a portion of the tract owned by the offender does the remainder of the tract have sufficient nexus to the criminal activity for seizure purposes?

See 59.05(e): "If the court finds that all or any part of the property is subject to forfeiture, the judge shall foreit the property to the state..." If the owner wants to protect the non-criminal portion of his property from forfeiture, he should sever it from the criminally-connected portion of the property before it gets seized.

"The property," apparently referring to at least the deeded tract and possibly all adjoining, but separately described (or even separately acquired) tracts.

Gary, glad to see you landed. How's life in Llano? I hear it's pretty out that way.