BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
In Re: ) ORDER
XXXXX ) Appeal No. 91-1313
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission pursuant to XXXXX Police Department's application for the award of one 35mm Nikon camera, one Nikon 70mm-200mm lens, and one camera case which were seized by the XXXXX Police Department from XXXXX during her arrest for unlawful possession of a controlled substance.
XXXXX, Presiding Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the XXXXX Police Department was XXXXX, Assistant Utah Attorney General. Although duly notified of the time, date and place of the hearing, XXXXX was not present due to her incarceration.
Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, the Tax Commission hereby makes its:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. XXXXX was arrested on XXXXX for violation of the Controlled Substances Act. At the time of her arrest she had in her possession one Nikon 35mm camera, one Nikon 70mm-210mm lens and one camera bag.
2. The above mentioned items were seized by the arresting officers and held by the XXXXX Police Department until the items were released to the Utah State Tax Commission.
3. On XXXXX, an assessment was levied against XXXXX for failure to have the necessary drug tax stamps affixed to the controlled substances in the amount of $$$$$.
4. Pursuant to a tax warrant and lien which was filed in the District Court, the above described property, as well as other property belonging to XXXXX, was seized by the Collection Division of the State Tax Commission.
5. The other property seized by the Collection Division was subsequently sold at public auction. The proceeds of that auction were used to satisfy the assessment against XXXXX.
6. The property in question was appraised by three photography stores. The three bids received were: 1) $$$$$; 2) $$$$$; and 3) $$$$$.
7. The XXXXX Police Department has need of the property in question for use in the continued enforcement of controlled substance laws.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Property in kind obtained from the taxpayer as a result of the Illegal Drug Stamp Tax Act may be awarded to a participating law enforcement agency if the property is of use or benefit to the participating law enforcement agency in the continued enforcement of controlled substance laws. (Utah Code Ann.§59-19-105(7)).
DECISION AND ORDER
In the present case, the Tax Commission finds that awarding the property in question to the XXXXX Police Department for its use or benefit in the continued enforcement of controlled substance laws is appropriate. The Commission further finds that the value of the property is $$$$$. That amount shall be credited towards the assessment deficiency of its owner, XXXXX. It is so ordered.
DATED this 25 day of November, 1991.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco S. Blaine Willes