Getting your car impounded is never fun. It’s a nauseating and embarrassing experience regardless of the circumstances. But for one New Mexico man, having his car impounded turned into a decade-long search to get it back. That’s how long it took Leo Martinez of Albuquerque to find his 1970 Chevy Chevelle SS 454 after police impounded it. Police seized the car while he spent nine months in jail after pleading guilty to a DWI charge, according to KOB 4.
The trouble started in 2009 when Albuquerque Police Department officers pulled over Martinez after leaving a bar. When Martinez was released months later, he began his search. Try as he might, he couldn’t find the vehicle. He went to different car shows thinking someone had bought it, but everyone he talked to said they hadn’t seen the car.
It wasn’t until March 2019 when Martinez saw the vehicle on a Facebook post, which said the vehicle was nearly crushed. The post also said the Albuquerque Police Department would turn the vehicle into a show car for the department. Martinez filed a lawsuit to get his Chevy Chevelle returned.
KOB 4 attempted to help Martinez track down his car, making phone calls in an attempt to find it, but the efforts came up short. Then, a KOB 4 crew found the car in a storage yard operated by the City of Albuquerque. The city later said it would not turn the Chevy Chevelle into a show car and instead return it to Martinez.
The sudden reversal from Albuquerque isn’t a surprise. Martinez getting his car back happened just weeks after plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit against the city for allegedly illegally seizing and keeping vehicles even after the practice, called civil asset forfeiture, was ruled unconstitutional. Some who’ve had their car taken were never charged with crimes while others who managed to get their vehicles back from the city got them back in significantly a condition that was significantly worse than they were before.
As for civil asset forfeiture, it isn’t new – but its appearance in the news cycle feels somewhat sudden. At its core, the practice is a legal tool that allows police to seize property assumed to be involved in criminal activity, but like seizing the home of a drug lord during a raid. Though it makes sense in some cases, law enforcement agencies across the country have used the program to take property without ever charging the property owner with a crime, and the courts are just now reigning in that power. Nevertheless, Martinez has now been reunited with his Chevy Chevelle – although doing so took roughly a decade.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet Chevelle news, Chevrolet news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Source: KOB 4
Comments
DUI laws are a joke!!! They should not be allowed and should be removed from the books. DUI laws are unconstitutional!!!
DUI laws are not on the books for safety like they preach. The laws are on the books to make money for a industry that would not exist without those laws in place.
Sober driver are involved in more accidents every year and kill more people driving cars and trucks then drunk drivers do. The reason they focus on the drunk drivers is that the avg cost of a DUI is 10K the avg cost of a normal accident is couple hundred dollar fine!!!
So if a sober driver drives home and doesn’t hit anything or cause a accident, how is that any different if a drunk driver drives home and does the same?
If you can drive from one place to another without getting into a accident then you should be able to do so.
Just my opinion
“Just my opinion:
and what a wrong opinion it is! Once again Brian, you truly can have your own personal opinion, AND be wrong and uninformed about it when you share it with others!
The reason why sober people appear to kill more people on the roads than drunks do is that, at any given time in the US, there are ALWAYS more sober people behind the wheel than drunks.
Furthermore, DUI fines cost what they do to DISCOURAGE bad public behaviour that threatens public safety; behaviour like drinking and driving. Driving is a privilege after all, not a right, and if you’re drunk and you choose to drive a car, the government has every legal authority to strip you of your driving privileges and make you pay the fine for your damages caused by your negligence.
It’ll be a cold day in the US if DUI laws were rendered unconstitutional, and given how you’re trying to argue for their abolishment, it makes me wonder if you yourself have a number of convicted DUI’s to your name and have tried to argue in court, unsuccessfully, that your drinking and driving is somehow safer than the many millions of sober drivers on the road right this second.
If you even bothered to read the article, you’d know that this has nothing to do with a DUI and everything to do with the unconstitutional practice of civil forfeiture.
Moron, and I really don’t care if you’re personally offended by me calling you that, but you do fit the description with your broken opinion and fractured reasoning.
Both of you morons are pathetic!!! You know nothing about me, and ofcourse both of you are wrong again!!! I have had zero DUI’S!!! And I have had no more then a minor fender bender in my life.
I argue against the DUI laws because law enforcement only focuses on these laws. Instead of trying to get all bed drivers off of the road. They charge more for DUI’S because they know morons like you will support it.
When a sober driver runs a red light and causes a accident its considered just that a accident and that driver gets a ticket for a couple hundred bucks. But when a drunk driver runs that same red light he gets arrested and charged with jail time and a 10K fine!!!
There’s apples for apples example!!!
It’s not about safety it’s about more!!!
Being the morons that both of your are it doesn’t surprise me that you can comprehend this!!!
“When a sober driver runs a red light and causes a accident its considered just that a accident and that driver gets a ticket for a couple hundred bucks. But when a drunk driver runs that same red light he gets arrested and charged with jail time and a 10K fine!!!”
But it is about public safety, and you’ve given us a public safety example, so make up your mind.
If you willing and knowingly impair your abilities to operate a motor vehicle by drinking and you cause an accident, you’re subject to the laws that govern responsible car operation.
If you cannot be responsible when operating a car when sober, you get fined for your infractions and behaviour.
However….
If you cannot be responsible when operating a car when after WILLING consuming more than the legal limit of alcohol or marijuana, you get fined for your infractions and behaviour.
What you’re missing is the responsibility of the driver in their actions before they choose to drive. If the driver willing chooses to become impaired beforehand, then they must suffer the consequences for endangering the public.
How many fines, Brian? How long has your licences been suspended?
Bad drivers, intoxicated or not, DO threaten public safety. My argument is we need to completely redo driver license requirements in the US. Charge $500 for your license. Fail the test? $1000. Fail it again? $1500, and so fourth. 50 hours worth of driving training time would be a requirement.
I support DUI laws, want drunk drivers prosecuted, and removed from the road.
But you just ignore the other bad drivers!!!
Brian, respectfully, I didn’t say that.
It saddens me that there are people like you loose in this country, with no regard for anyone but yourself.
99.99% of drivers are sober, that’s why there are more sober drivers causing accidents.
I can understand. However, it not only saddens me but is angering when those who in a discussion prejudge a comment and then proliferate their ignorance. That is rampant in this country, and confuses reasonable logic. It behooves intelligent discussion to not jump to a conclusion, hold one’s peace, and consider what someone else is sincerely putting in effort to put out in the public. Again, I mean no offense.
I support restraining and if need punishing impaired drivers, regardless of whether it be the subject (alcohol), cell phones many are damnably attached to, those falling asleep, excessive yakking, etc.
Brian,
Defending DUI drivers is unconscionable. Perhaps you have none.
Drunk drivers should be shot on the side of the road like rabid dogs. That would take care of the problem since they kill defenceless people. These repeated offenders should be dealt with, with extreme prejudice. Water board them, beat them with baseball bats, taser their private parts… Nothing should be held back.
Are you the same redneck who lives in a trailer park and drives an old antique C4 thinking he’s the King of the county? Lol
You could not be more wrong!!!
I don’t think so. Only a drunk would defend drunks…
Hope someone gets to taser your private parts with a fully charged unit on level 10. That may bring some sense to you. Maybe?
While DUI is certainly serious, some of the laws like this one are excessive for a first DUI offense. It does seem to be more about the money the city can take from someone charged with any DUI offense, under the ruse of safety. Glad he finally got his nice car back at least.
The crime here is not DUI, it’s civil asset forfeiture. It may have been found unconstitutional in that jurisdiction but still exists elsewhere.
Should of never been charged in the first place
Without knowing anything about him, a reader can obviously deduce that Brian has had a lot of DUIs, and will have many more in the future.
Cops are the most corrupt entity in America. It’s disgusting what they get away with. They’re worse than the old Mafioso.
I would say it is the state law makers, the politicians that used to be lawyers. When laws are proposed and wrapped up in a bill with other higher profile issues to hide them. It is nothing more then a bait and switch disguised for corruption, for nothing more then profit.
It is easier to get away with a 1% tax on 80% of the population (middle + lower class) https://finance.zacks.com/lower-middle-upper-class-income-levels-9877.html then an 4% tax on the other 20%.
It happens every day.
Do the crime ….. pay the fine
You want corruption? try this on for size and see how it fits!
https://www.ocregister.com/2019/04/16/californias-gas-taxes-total-nearly-1-per-gallon-and-include-a-28-cent-mystery-surcharge/
Do a search for “California Demands Restaurants Charge Customers 1% ‘Climate Change’ Fee”,
Climate Change? What would the climate change be if they stopped building houses? (We can’t do that, we need/”WANT” the tax dollars).
Corruption in America?
What is the only license in America that doesn’t expire?
I agree with Brian. It’s all about the money. Texting and driving is just as worse as drunk driving. But the difference is couple hundred verse 10k. Brian you are correct. I do not have DUI either.
You guys arguing about duis being unconstitutional are idiots, and are kids that should of been swallowed. Drunk drivers get what they deserve, you are right that fines should be more for texting, but stop reading on the internet for stats on them. I would be pissed, if a drunk ran a red light and totaled my $70k car or hurt one of my loved ones. Why don’t you guys go stand in a crosswalk at closing time by your hometowns nearest bar and do us all a favor. I’ve never read something from somebody more clueless about life in general.
Just because law enforcement says your drunk by the numbers doesnt mean you cant drive a car. For some people being over the influence is 2 drinks. That’s pathetic, I know plenty of people who can drive a car after drinking 2 beers.
Utah just lowered the DUI limit to .050 from .080. That’s maybe one beer!!! There’s only one reason they decided to do this, not to prevent deaths but to generate more revenue.
It’s a privilege to own a gun, if you are carrying a gun you cant be arrested if you haven’t used it yet. The same should be used for driving, if you are drunk and you have not hit anything yet you should not be arrested.
Because you haven’t done anything yet!!!
Would you be just as mad if a sober driver ran that red light? Because that happens a whole lot more often!
We should be trying to get bad drivers off of the road not just drunk drivers.
your not changing my mind, and unfort im not gonna change yours, and i dont care, your right i would be just as mad, the ONLY reason that there are more accidents from sober drivers is pretty simple, theres more sober drivers, so simple math works pretty easy, yes i think you can drive after 1 beer and maybe 2, the utah .05 law is lame, i get that, i also get that if someone fails a field soberity test, a bac # dont matter. youll beat the dui if you prove it in court, thats the chance you take for driving, plain and simple. its NOT a privilege to own a gun, its a right, its not a right to drive a car, read a bit. the term “drunk” you use pretty liberaly, if your drunk idgaf if you did something or not, your drunk you shouldnt be on the road, you can drink without getting drunk, you can fix laws in your state by voting, go out and vote to change laws, thats how the country works. by driving drunk you have already broken the law, stop with the soverign citizen bs, grow up and adult
It sounds like the city of Albuquerque is corrupt. I’m all for taking the profits and assets from drug dealers, crooked businesses and, yes, crooked POLITICIANS. But, to make laws that are unconstitutional and then, to not obey the court after it was proven so, is just plain wrong. I’d say he’s got a winning lawsuit in his hands. I say, “Do it and I believe you’ll win!”
Question is will we see anyone involved in the corruption go to jail?
https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/02/memo-suggests-bell-police-turn-ticketing-impounding-cars-into-baseball-game.html
I’ll drink to that !
I’m NOT going 2 continue Brian’s Misconception’s over a DUI! “(from what i’ve learned about drinking anything w/alcohol is not only harmful to the body; it’s also involved w/ killing brain cell’s for all intellectual thinking)”! Since alcohol is in gasoline; what do you think it does to your inner organs when consumed? Everybody: just don’t take the hint when a person get’s their 1st DUI! Leo made the wrong choice for even going to a Bar for R & R!
Ever head the name Jim Fixx?
I have some lyrics for you! https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=-EzURpTF5c8&t=4m56s
It still doesn’t give any law enforcement agency to keep anyone’s property, even if it’s used for evidence, once the sentence is handed down the nearest next of kin should be notified, if not you are no longer dealing with law enforcement or a judicial system at that point you are back to dealing with Nazi Germany!! If it’s not being used as evidence it’s unconstitutional!!
I dont agree with driving under the influences of drugs or alcohol…but at least drunks are looking at the windshield instead of their cell phone. What are the coffee drinkers going to do when added to the list of the addicted?
If you can drive drunk, or texting, or talking, or drinking, or eating without causing a accident. Then you should be able to with worry of getting a ticket or being arrested.
It’s called having the ability to drive, some people can do it other people cant. For the people who can then they should be allowed to.
We make these blanket laws to cover all people which is ridiculous.
Everyone thinks they have the ability to drive. But the evidence that people cannot drive safely while drunk is pretty clear. Not a new concept here. Just because you didn’t wreck doing it 100 times doesn’t mean you were safe and could have reacted properly if someone in front of you hit their brakes. There are alcoholics who can’t even function below a .08 BAC but for the rest of us to drive at that level would not be wise. The laws are there for a reason. And to compare that to talking in the car is laughable.
What are the coffee drinkers going to do when added to the list of the addicted?
It has already happened.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/24/california-dui-caffeine-lawsuit-solano-county
Reading these comments leads me to believe that most of you are drunk or stoned right now…
You bet man! Life is groovy and every day is a delightful haze.
Peace brothers.
When people are drunk behind the wheel you see double or more images through your eyes from your brain processing the chemicals of the alcohol through your bloodstream to your nerve endings throughout your body; when you drink alcohol it extremely suppresses your reaction time to react to what you hear or see to be more responsible behind the wheel; if u think you’re safe w/2 beers u r f*cking mistaken! Being under the influence of a controlled substance of anything that deters the chemical communication throughout your body and your brain that’s when you start making mistakes that you would not do normally when sober; SO GET IT STRAIGHT EVERYBODY: if you drink any alcohol beverage from beer 2 Whiskey be prepared for handcuffs and state fines where you reside because people who are sober watch people who drink & drive like they’re drunk and Report on their phones who look like they’re driving drunk and report them to get them off the road; SO CRAM THIS UP YOUR AZZ! (by the way:talking this sh*t is off the main storyline; so cut the sh*t)!