Henry and Minh Cheng, a husband-and-wife team, have been running a wholesale jewelry business in California for 30 years. Earlier this year, they made a bulk sale of jewelry merchandise to a retail customer in Virginia, who paid for the order by placing cash in a parcel and mailing it via FedEx to the Chengs in California. The parcel was seized by an Indianapolis police officer at the FedEx hub, and the state prosecutor subsequently initiated civil asset forfeiture proceedings to retain the $42,825 found in the parcel. In Indiana, law enforcement officers are authorized to inspect packages and set aside those deemed suspicious based on certain criteria. According to the lawsuit, one of these "suspicious" factors includes whether a box is taped on all seams, despite FedEx advising customers to secure all seams of a package with tape. Another "suspicious" factor cited by officers is if the parcel's destination is California, which they label a "source state" — a designation used despite California being the most populous state in the country. Packages flagged by police are presented to a K-9 unit. If the dog alerts to a package, officers then seek a warrant to open it. Often, even if the package contains no narcotics or illegal contraband but does contain cash, law enforcement will keep the money, as occurred in this case. Despite failing to identify a crime committed by the Chengs, the prosecutor’s office targeted the package for forfeiture and is attempting to retain the cash found within. “This scheme is one of the most predatory we have seen, and it’s past time to put a stop to it,” said Sam Gedge, a senior attorney with the Institute of Justice (IJ), the law firm representing the Chengs. “It’s illegal and unconstitutional for Indiana to forfeit in-transit money whose only connection to Indiana is the happenstance of FedEx’s shipping practices.” Civil asset forfeiture allows police to seize property based on mere suspicion that it is involved in criminal activity. Prosecutors can then permanently retain the property without ever charging the owner with a crime. According to the IJ’s report "Policing for Profit," local, state, and federal agencies collectively forfeit billions of dollars each year through civil forfeiture. Over the past two decades, the report explains, police have seized more than $68 billion from Americans through asset forfeiture. “In the past two years alone, the Marion County Prosecutor’s Office has sued to forfeit currency from FedEx parcels in-transit from one non-Indiana state to another at least 130 times,” according to the lawsuit. Since 2022, Indiana has initiated proceedings to forfeit more than $2.5 million from in-transit parcels and has already secured over $1 million. The court filing accuses law enforcement officers of violating Indiana’s own civil forfeiture statute, as well as the Eighth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. “The Indiana government cannot take money from people just because a shipping company routes it through Indiana,” said IJ Attorney Marie Miller. “Henry and Minh have never been to Indiana or done business in Indiana, but now they have to defend against a forfeiture action in Indiana, without the state bothering to identify an Indiana crime that it can allege the money is linked to.” Last fall, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled unanimously that civil forfeiture defendants in the state have a right to trial by jury, although prosecutors have resisted efforts to have jury trials.The State of Indiana is facing a lawsuit over allegations that law enforcement unlawfully seized tens of thousands of dollars from a couple's package while it was located at a FedEx facility.
