Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/16-122_1b7d.pdf
Page Number: 1

Cite as:  580 U. S. ____ (2017) 

1 

Statement of THOMAS, J. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

LISA OLIVIA LEONARD v. TEXAS 

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF 

APPEALS OF TEXAS, NINTH DISTRICT
 

No. 16–122.  Decided March 6, 2017 

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. 

  Statement  of  JUSTICE  THOMAS  respecting  the  denial  of 
certiorari. 

This  petition  asks  an  important  question:  whether
modern  civil-forfeiture  statutes  can  be  squared  with  the
Due Process Clause and our Nation’s history. 

I 

Early  in  the  morning  on  April  1,  2013,  a  police  officer 
stopped  James  Leonard  for  a  traffic  infraction  along  a
known  drug  corridor.    During  a  search  of  the  vehicle,  the 
officer found a safe in the trunk.  Leonard and his passen-
ger,  Nicosa  Kane,  gave  conflicting  stories  about  the  con-
tents of the safe, with Leonard at one point indicating that
it belonged to his mother, who is the petitioner here.  The 
officer obtained a search warrant and discovered that the 
safe contained $201,100 and a bill of sale for a Pennsylva-
nia home. 

The  State  initiated  civil  forfeiture  proceedings  against 
the  $201,100  on  the  ground  that  it  was  substantially 
connected  to  criminal  activity,  namely,  narcotics  sales.
See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 59.01 (Vernon Cum.
Supp. 2016).  The trial court issued a forfeiture order, and 
petitioner  appealed.  Citing  the  suspicious  circumstances
of the stop and the contradictory stories provided by Leon-
ard  and  Kane,  the  Court  of  Appeals  affirmed  the  trial 
court’s  conclusion  that  the  government  had  shown  by  a
preponderance  of  the  evidence  that  the  money  was  either 
the proceeds of a drug sale or intended to be used in such a