Med-West Demands Money Be Returned After District Attorney’s Office Misses Deadline

In January 2016, San Diego law enforcement raided a cannabis business, Med-West Distribution based in Kearny Mesa, and they seized $300,000 in cash. Owner James Slatic’s life was thrown into disarray as his legal business’ assets were confiscated, his wife and daughter’s bank accounts were frozen, and his employees were arrested (and later released). Slatic and his attorney began immediate action to take back the seized money, but it wasn’t until later in November that Slatic and his attorney were able to take action in an attempt to have the money returned. During this time the Institute for Justice filed a motion asking for the return of Slatic’s property. Unfortunately, the attempt was unsuccessful, as a judge in December ruled that Slatic’s assets would not be returned.

Now, Slatic and his attorney are attempting once again to demand that his money be returned—this time with a new course of action. Claiming that the San Diego District Attorney (DA) did not meet the deadline to file a formal forfeiture petition, Slatic filed a motion on Thursday, February 16 and asked once again that the money, an estimated $100,000, be returned to him.

The San Diego DA’s office states that based on California’s Health and Safety Code 11488.4, it has until June 2017 to file an action against Slatic and the property he wishes to reclaim, according to Inc. Tanya Sierra, a spokesperson for the DA’s office, made a statement about the details of the timeline. “We believe it is the seizure that starts the [statute of limitations] clock and not the freeze order,” Sierra said. “We do not consider [a search warrant to freeze a bank account] a ‘process’ within the meaning of asset forfeiture laws.”

Earlier this month, Wesley Hottot, an attorney working for the Institute of Justice who is representing Slatic and his case, reached out to DA Del Portillo. Via email correspondence, he asked whether or not the DA’s office planned to return the confiscated money following a lack of action regarding the statute of limitations. In response, Portillo provided a definite “no” and added that the office had amended the forfeiture to include both the $300,000 cash that was found at Med West during the initial raid, as well as Slatic’s personal $100,000 that was taken from the bank. “I don’t think they would’ve done that if they didn’t have concerns about how they ran passed the limitations period,” Hottot noted.

In investigating the law in detail, Inc. reported two different lawyers who provided their interpretation of the law. Attorney Michael Cindrich told Inc. that “the California statute of limitations for civil asset forfeiture starts as soon as the individual is deprived of his or her property.” Similarly, Criminal Defense Lawyer Nicholas Moore shared that a search warrant to freeze someone’s bank account is almost always a formal action that immediately marks the start of the statutory clock. The timeline discrepancy is both a problem and opportunity for Slatic and his case, as now there’s finally hope that he may get his money back after all.