In January 2024, a First Supply, LLC truck was struck by a drunk driver while stopped at a red light. Although First Supply’s driver was not at fault, the Winnebago County Sheriff’s Office seized the truck as evidence for the criminal investigation of the reckless driver. Following the seizure, a sheriff’s deputy informed First Supply that the truck could be held for years, even though the sheriff did not obtain a warrant, did not request First Supply’s permission to take and keep the truck indefinitely, and provided no information or receipt on how First Supply might retrieve it.
Despite repeated attempts by First Supply to get the sheriff to release the truck, they were met with unhelpful responses and a lack of clear information. The criminal case against the at-fault driver was initially dismissed in July 2024. Even with the case closed, the Winnebago County State’s Attorney’s Office continued to hold the truck. Then, in October 2024, the case against the driver was refiled.
First Supply’s truck just sat in an impound yard for more than a year. The company was forced to lease a replacement vehicle while still making payments on the seized truck. The truck was left exposed to the elements in an open-air impound lot for more than a year, causing further deterioration.
In April 2025, First Supply filed a lawsuit against Winnebago County Sheriff Gary Caruana and State’s Attorney J. Hanley for violating First Supply’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment property rights. The sheriff’s seizure and retention of the First Supply truck was unreasonable without a warrant or exigent circumstances, and the company was denied due process because it received no adequate notice or hearing to reclaim its property. After the lawsuit was filed, the government finally returned the truck to First Supply in July 2025.
First Supply continues to fight for just compensation to cover the damages incurred.
First Supply is represented by Pacific Legal Foundation and Liberty Justice Center free of charge.
What’s At Stake?
- The government cannot take an innocent bystander’s property without a warrant. Doing so violates the Fourth Amendment.
- Property owners are entitled to due process, including adequate notice and a timely hearing, when their property is seized.
