(1) Any personal property subject to seizure, confiscation, or forfeiture under the provisions of this part 3 may be seized:
(a) Pursuant to any writ, order, or injunction issued under the provisions of this part 3; or
(b) Under the authority of a search warrant; or
(c) By any peace officer or agent of a seizing agency with probable cause to believe that such property is a public nuisance or otherwise subject to confiscation and forfeiture under this part 3 if the seizure is incident to a lawful search or arrest.
(2) The provisions of this section shall not be construed to limit or forbid the seizure of any such personal property in any manner now or hereafter required, authorized, or permitted by law.
(3) If a rental motor vehicle is seized pursuant to this part 3, the seizing agency shall notify the motor vehicle rental company of the seizure if the motor vehicle is identified as a rental motor vehicle. The motor vehicle rental company may appear at the seizing agency and request the return of the rental motor vehicle. The rental motor vehicle shall be returned to the motor vehicle rental company unless the motor vehicle must be maintained in the custody of the seizing agency for evidentiary purposes or if the seizing agency has probable cause to believe the motor vehicle rental company, at the time of rental, had knowledge or notice of the criminal activity for which the rental car was used.
Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 265, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-13-315. L. 87: (1)(b) amended and (1)(c) added, p. 638, § 11, effective July 1. L. 2002: (3) added, p. 924, § 7, effective July 1.
ANNOTATION
In civil suit for abatement of defendant's home and its contents as a public nuisance probable cause must be established showing that there is a substantial connection between property to be seized and nuisance activity. People v. Taube, 843 P.2d 79 (Colo. App. 1992).
Warrantless entry and search of defendant's home were invalid, and evidence would be suppressed, where conditions of subsection (1) were not met and search was not otherwise justified. People v. Taube, 864 P.2d 123 (Colo. 1993).
Court's finding of probable cause to believe that a house constituted a public nuisance was not equivalent to a finding that probable cause existed to enter and search the contents of the house. People v. Taube, 864 P.2d 123 (Colo. 1993).