Hamilton County Controversy?
There is somewhat of a controversy brewing in the Republican primary for the Hamilton County Prosecutor’s race. It’s an election involving incumbent Sonja Leerkamp and challenger Paul Felix. Leerkamp has been in office since 1995, while Felix has done most of his work in Johnson County. Since there is no real Democratic opposition in the HC, whoever wins the primary, will likely win the general election.
There have been some rumblings in the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Department by the rank and file over Leerkamp’s use of a private attorney for asset forfeiture cases. Asset forfeiture allows law enforcement to collect proceeds from illegal activity. Under Indiana law, proceeds confiscated via asset forfeiture are usually divided between the local law enforcement and the common school fund. Asset forfeiture is codified in the Indiana Code in sections 34-24-1-1 through 34-24-1-9.
It is not uncommon for a county prosecutor to use outside counsel to do asset forfeiture work. According to a 2001 Justice Department study, 73.1% of prosecutor offices across the country that are similar in size to Hamilton county do not engage their prosecutors in forfeiture actions or any other civil actions.
What’s caused a fuss in the HC is the person who does the forfeiture. The attorney is Bruce Petit, who works part-time for the Boone County Prosecutor’s Office. Leerkamp tells me that this works for the taxpayers in the HC because “[Petit] is familiar with criminal law as well as the forfeiture process and often receives calls from officers ‘on the scene’ requesting guidance on the seizure of property. The attorney is paid on a contingency basis, retaining 1/3 of the amount of recovered assets and saving Hamilton County the expense of having a deputy prosecutor’s time tied up in this civil recovery process.”
In 2005, the total assets recovered by Hamilton County Law Enforcement were $38, 454.96. The largest portion of these funds was proceeds of assets seized by the Hamilton/Boone County Drug Task Force. According to those figures, Petit collected almost $13,000. The concern for some sheriff’s deputies is Petit’s relationship with Leerkamp. According to court records, Petit handled Leerkamp’s bankruptcy in 1995. I am also told he has done other work for Leerkamp as her private attorney. I called Petit to ask him a few questions but he did not return my calls. Leerkamp has agreed to come on my radio program Monday and discuss the issue. The critics say that the money going to Petit could stay in the county because there is someone on staff in the Sheriff’s department who can do the same job.
No word yet on whether Leerkamp’s opponent Paul Felix will use this in the final days of the campaign. However the two big questions for Leerkamp will be one, why use an outside attorney if there is someone on the county payroll who can do the work, why not use them? And second should the lawyer doing asset forfeiture be one who handled the county prosecutor’s bankruptcy and reportedly other legal work? Stay tuned…
