It is illegal for the police to hold property that has no evidentiary value as a hostage. That is exactly what happened to our client Erline Mencias. Mr. Mencias, a construction contractor, had his van seized in the course of an investigation of whether a passenger in the van had been involved in a bar fight. No allegations were ever leveled against Mr. Mencias. The police held the van with the hope that Mr. Mencias would provide testimony against the passenger – something he was unable to truthfully do. Mr. Mencias needed the van and the tools in it in order to do his work as a contractor. He lost business and income and had to buy a new van, which affected his ability to support his family. After more than a year of litigation and on the eve of trial, the District of Columbia agreed to compensate Mr. Mencias $142,000 in damages, attorney’s fees and costs.

Immediately after it was seized, Mr. Mencias requested that MPD return his van. The police told him they would not release it until he revealed the identity of the passenger, a man he had met the day of the incident and whom he did not know. Mr. Mencias is not a native English speaker and he had difficulty communicating with the MPD officers. Mr. Mencias was never charged with a crime. After over a year, Mr. Mencias filed suit against the MPD officer who was holding his van and tools. He was represented by the Washington Lawyers’ Committee and Public Citizen (the case was originally filed with the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law and then moved to Public Citizen along with the clinic professors). He alleged that the continued seizure of his van violated his rights under the 4th and 5th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

In March 2017, United States District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan issued an important opinion that the MPD violated Mr. Mencias’s Fourth Amendment rights by hold the van after it been searched and was no longer needed. Judge Chutkan concluded that using the van as bait was not allowed under the Constitution.

Last month, Mr. Mencias settled his case with the MPD and received compensation for his lost income and the expense of having to buy a new van. Mr. Mencias’s victory is not just about the money but also the law that he helped establish to prevent the police from taking advantage of D.C. residents.