BENNIS vs MICHIGAN

Facts. Tina Bennis (Petitioner) jointly owned a car with her husband. The police arrested him after
observing him having sex with a prostitute in their car. An indecency law states that the government can
seek forfeiture of property that is a public nuisance. The government sought to declare the car a public
nuisance.

Issue. If an owner of property does not know how her property is being used by another, can the
owners interest still be forfeited?

Held. Yes. A long line of cases holds that an owners interest in property may be forfeited by reason of
the use to which to property is put even though the owner did not know how her property was being
used.
Forfeiture of property prevents further illicit use in two ways. It prevents further illicit use of the
property and renders the illegal behavior unprofitable by imposing an economic penalty.
The government is not required to compensate an owner for property, which it has already lawfully
acquired under the exercise of governmental authority other than the power of eminent domain. Thus,
there was no taking that required compensation.
Petitioners automobile facilitated and was used in criminal activity. The state sought to deter illegal
activity, and they rightly do so by subjecting the car to forfeiture.