Illinois Supreme Court
Criminal Court
Forfeiture
Court properly concluded that State provided sufficient proof to establish statutory prerequisites for civil forfeiture of claimant's motorcycle by preponderance of the evidence. Claimant admitted that she knowingly gave her husband consent to drive her motorcycle although she knew he was intoxicated and his license was revoked. As claimant did not present sufficient evidence of value of motorcycle to enable court to determine whether forfeiture was an unconstitutionally excessive penalty, she failed to meet her substantial burden of proof in challenging constitutionality of forfeiture statute as applied.(FREEMAN, THOMAS, GARMAN, and THEIS, concurring; KARMEIER, dissenting; BURKE, dissenting.)