Drug-Case Forfeitures Will Be Reviewed : Supreme Court: The justices agree to consider limits on seizing property of people linked to narcotics violations.

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to consider putting new limits on the government’s most popular weapon in the war on drugs, accepting an appeal filed by a South Dakota man who lost his home and his business after selling two grams of cocaine.

With prosecutors increasingly using forfeiture orders to confiscate the property of those who violate drug laws, the justices said they would rule on whether it is unconstitutional to seize a person’s home and business over a relatively minor drug crime.

In the past decade, forfeiture orders in drug cases have spawned a growth industry, as cars, boats, jewels, condominiums and mansions have been seized from drug dealers and put on sale.

Prosecutors say drug criminals should be forced to give up their ill-gotten gains.

But the federal forfeiture law is broadly worded and applies not just to big-time drug dealers who buy a mansion with the drug profits, but also to someone who foolishly sells a relatively small amount of an illegal drug at his home or business.

Moreover, the law can be triggered by a single drug conviction. It says, “All real property . . . which is used in any manner to commit or facilitate the commission” of a drug crime “shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States.” To prevail in a seizure case, the prosecutor need show only that an illegal drug was kept briefly in the defendant’s house or business.

But some federal judges have begun to question whether the government’s seemingly unlimited power to seize property in these cases violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

In the South Dakota case, Richard L. Austin repaired and rebuilt cars at his auto body shop in Garretson. He lived nearby in a 20-year old mobile home.

On June 13, 1990, a drug informant stopped by the body shop and offered to buy cocaine. Austin then went to the mobile home and returned with two grams of the drug.

The next day, police returned with warrants and searched Austin’s home and shop. They found several small bags of marijuana and cocaine and $3,300 in cash. Austin pleaded guilty to one count of possession of an illegal drug with an intent to distribute and was sentenced to seven years in state prison.

In addition, however, federal prosecutors, citing that conviction, filed a civil forfeiture order against Austin’s property. After a brief hearing, his auto shop and mobile home were seized by the government.

The U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the forfeiture order last year, but with apparent reluctance. “In this case, it does appear that the government is exacting too high a penalty in relation to the offense committed,” wrote Judge Floyd Gibson for the appeals court.