There is a legal process in the United States called civil asset forfeiture, and if you drive a truck, carry cash, or run a small business that deals in either, you need to understand it before you drive through Texas — or most other states — with your operating capital in your pocket.
The case of Ameal Woods is the clearest example of why.
Woods is a truck driver from Mississippi who, in May 2019, was trying to grow his small trucking business from one tractor-trailer to two. He had saved $22,800 of his own money, borrowed $13,000 from his niece, and taken $6,500 from his partner. He had $42,300 total, sealed in vacuum packaging the way his family had always stored cash, placed in the trunk of his rental car. He was driving to Houston to buy a truck.
On Interstate 10 in Harris County, Texas, a sheriff’s deputy pulled him over for allegedly following a tractor-trailer too closely. Woods, who holds a CDL himself, knew he had not been following too closely, but he did not argue. When the deputy asked if he had any cash, Woods said yes and explained what it was for. When the deputy asked to search the car, Woods said yes. The deputy found the vacuum-sealed cash in the trunk, set it on the hood of his patrol car, and seized it. His stated reason: “I think this money is connected to drugs.”
No drugs were found. No drugs were charged. Woods was not arrested. The deputy let him drive away — with his legally owned firearm still in the car — without even issuing a written warning for the alleged following-too-close violation.
The business trip that was supposed to expand Woods’ trucking operation turned into a six-year legal fight to recover his own money. In 2023, a civil jury actually sided with Harris County, ruling the forfeiture was justified despite zero criminal evidence. In October 2025, a Texas appeals court reversed that verdict and ordered the money returned. As of the November 2025 reporting on the case, Harris County had still not returned a single dollar and was considering appealing further.
Every owner-operator who carries cash on the road needs to understand exactly what made this possible — and what it means for their own operation.
Civil Asset Forfeiture: The Business Case Against Carrying Cash
Civil asset forfeiture is a legal process that allows law enforcement to seize property — cash, vehicles, equipment — they suspect is connected to criminal activity, without charging the owner with a crime. The government does not sue you. It sues your property. The case is literally filed as something like “State of Texas v. $42,300 in United States Currency.”
That distinction is not procedural trivia. It has enormous practical consequences. Because the case is civil rather than criminal, the constitutional protections that apply to criminal defendants do not fully apply. You are not entitled to a court-appointed attorney if you cannot afford one. The standard of proof is not “beyond a reasonable doubt” — it is “preponderance of the evidence,” meaning the government only has to show it is more likely than not that the property was connected to crime. And in Texas and most other states, the burden of proof shifts to you — the property owner — to prove your innocence, not to the government to prove guilt.
In practical terms, this means: the police take your money. They file a civil suit against it. You have to hire a lawyer, appear in court, and prove the money is clean. If you cannot afford a lawyer, or if the legal fees would cost more than what was seized, you lose by default. In nearly 60% of the civil forfeiture cases reviewed in one major Texas study, people did not even contest the seizure — and their property was automatically forfeited.
That 60% figure is the number every small carrier needs to sit with. The majority of people who lose their property to civil forfeiture never fought it — not because they were guilty, but because fighting it was not practical. The math worked against them.
Why Truckers Are Specifically Targeted
The Woods case is not an isolated incident. It is representative of a documented pattern in Texas and across the country, and the Interstate highway system is where a significant share of it happens.
Texas generates over $50 million per year in state civil asset forfeiture proceeds. In 2025, Texas law enforcement agencies across the state generated more than $50 million combined through seizures. The money flows directly into law enforcement and prosecutor budgets — salaries, equipment, overtime. Between 2018 and 2020 alone, Harris County’s prosecutors added $7.7 million to their own budgets through forfeiture, while Harris County law enforcement added $15.9 million, more than $7.5 million of which went directly to officer salaries and overtime.
The Institute for Justice, the nonprofit public interest law firm that represented Woods, put the incentive structure plainly: law enforcement officers and the district attorneys who pursue forfeiture cases both receive financial benefit from the same money they seize. The officer who seizes cash and the prosecutor who fights to keep it in court both have a direct financial stake in the outcome. That is not an accusation of bad faith in any individual case — it is a description of the institutional structure that exists under Texas law, which the Texas Republican Party, Democratic Party, and Libertarian Party have all officially stated in their platforms should be reformed or abolished.
Truckers are targeted for specific structural reasons. Interstate highways are the obvious place to conduct highway interdiction. A driver with out-of-state plates, traveling alone, can be stopped for minor traffic infractions with no witness and no practical recourse right there on the road. Cash carried by a commercial driver can be framed as suspicious without any supporting evidence — the argument that “most drug money is transported in cash” applies equally to any other cash transaction, including buying a used truck.
The dog-alert-on-currency tactic used in Woods’ case — where deputies claimed a drug-sniffing dog had alerted to the scent of drugs on his money after he drove away — is one of the most widely documented justifications in forfeiture cases. It is also one of the most scientifically hollow: research has consistently found that a significant portion of circulating U.S. currency carries trace drug residue, which means a dog alert proves nothing about the specific cash in question beyond its status as U.S. currency.
The Institute for Justice found that Harris County was using copy-and-paste affidavit language across dozens of cases — with the same boilerplate signed by an officer who was not even present at the traffic stop. In the Woods case, the affidavit was signed by a deputy who was not there, contained language that mixed up car cases and cash cases because it was not written for his specific situation, and described behavioral observations that were never documented on body camera because the officers’ cameras were off — in violation of departmental policy.
The Specific Threat to Small Carriers and Owner-Operators
If you are running a small trucking operation and you are dealing with any of the following situations, civil asset forfeiture is a direct financial risk you need to plan around:
Carrying cash to buy a truck or equipment. This is exactly what Ameal Woods was doing. When you drive across state lines with the purchase price of a truck in your pocket, you are carrying the same profile that law enforcement interdiction programs treat as a red flag. The fact that buying a truck with cash is completely legal is not protection — it is your obligation to prove that after the fact, not the government’s obligation to disprove it before the seizure.
Carrying operating capital or payroll. Small carriers who run slim banking relationships and manage cash-heavy operations are exposed when transiting through states with aggressive forfeiture programs. The amount of money does not protect you. Harris County’s forfeiture statistics show seizures as small as a few hundred dollars and as large as seven figures. What matters to the state is that they can file a civil suit against whatever they take.
Driving through high-interdiction corridors. The Texas Tribune’s investigation identified specific corridors as disproportionately active for forfeiture activity: Harris County (Houston) on I-10 and I-45, Reeves County in West Texas where hundreds of thousands of dollars were seized from vehicles hauled by tractor-trailers, and Webb County on the southern border along I-35. The Midwest corridor I-40 has a similar documented history. These are freight arteries. They are also asset forfeiture arteries.
What You Can Do to Protect Yourself
The Institute for Justice and transportation attorneys who have dealt with these cases consistently offer the following practical guidance for commercial drivers and small business owners who transport cash.
Document everything before you travel. If you are carrying cash to buy a truck, equipment, or for any legitimate business purpose, document the source of every dollar before you leave. Bank withdrawal records, wire transfer history, invoices for the transaction you are traveling to complete, text messages or emails confirming the deal — all of it. The more paper that connects your cash to a legitimate documented transaction before the money moves, the harder it is for a forfeiture case to gain traction.
Know what consent means and costs you. In the Woods case, he consented to the search. Consent is not required. You have the right to decline a search of your vehicle during a traffic stop if the officer does not have probable cause or a warrant. Declining consent does not mean you are guilty of anything. It means you understand the Fourth Amendment. Whether to exercise that right in a specific interaction is a judgment call that depends on circumstances — but you should know it is a call you can make, and that consenting eliminates a significant legal protection you would otherwise have.
Never answer questions about cash voluntarily. You are required to provide your license, registration, and insurance. You are not required to tell an officer how much cash you are carrying or what it is for. The question “do you have any cash in the vehicle?” sounds routine. It is the entry point to every cash seizure on record. You can decline to answer questions beyond the required identification documents by saying “I’d prefer not to answer questions without an attorney present.” That is a legal statement, not an admission.
Use wire transfers or cashier’s checks for large business purchases where possible. The simplest protection against cash seizure is not carrying cash. Wire transfers and cashier’s checks for truck and equipment purchases produce an immediate paper trail that is far more difficult to claim was “connected to drug trafficking.” The used truck market’s preference for cash is understandable — it moves faster and avoids bank delays — but the legal exposure it creates is real. For transactions above $10,000, the risk profile of carrying cash versus wiring funds has changed significantly given how aggressively forfeiture programs have been documented operating on interstate highways.
Understand that fighting back works — but takes years. The Ameal Woods case is ultimately a story about someone who did not let the system run over him. He fought Harris County through a six-day civil trial, a jury verdict against him, an appellate reversal in his favor, and was still waiting for his money as of late 2025. The Institute for Justice’s data shows that people who fight forfeiture in court win or settle favorably at a meaningful rate. The problem is that most people cannot sustain a six-year fight. If you are ever in this situation, find an attorney who handles asset forfeiture cases — and know that organizations like the Institute for Justice take cases exactly like Woods’ on a pro bono basis when the constitutional questions are significant enough.
The Reform Picture and Where It Stands
Civil asset forfeiture reform has unusual political support. The Republican Party of Texas, the Democratic Party of Texas, and the Libertarian Party of Texas all stated in their 2024 platforms that civil asset forfeiture should require a criminal conviction before property can be permanently taken. All three parties — ideologically opposed on almost everything else — agree that what happened to Ameal Woods should not be legal.
The Texas Legislature has considered reform bills in multiple sessions without passing meaningful change. The financial incentive structure is part of why: the agencies that benefit from the existing system are well-organized, well-funded, and directly lobby against reform. The Harris County class-action lawsuit, in which Woods and his partner are the lead plaintiffs, is pursuing a permanent injunction that would stop the practice in Harris County entirely — a court-ordered reform that would accomplish what the legislature has not. As of this writing, that ruling is pending.
At the federal level, the Institute for Justice has consistently argued that states like Texas violate the constitutional guarantee of due process by placing the burden of proof on the property owner rather than the government. Federal courts have generally been reluctant to intervene in state forfeiture programs, but the cumulative weight of cases like Woods’ is building a constitutional record that may eventually force a reckoning.
For small carriers and owner-operators who do not have the time, money, or patience to be the test case that changes Texas law — which is the position nobody wants to be in while their truck purchase money is sitting in a sheriff’s evidence room — the practical response is not to wait for reform. It is to understand the risk, document your transactions, exercise your rights, and make deliberate decisions about when and how you carry operating capital across state lines.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: If I am stopped and an officer asks if I have cash, am I required to answer?
A: No. You are required to provide your driver’s license, vehicle registration, and proof of insurance during a traffic stop. You are not required to answer questions about what you are carrying, where you are going, or how much cash you have. You can decline by saying “I’d prefer not to answer questions without an attorney present.” This is a legal assertion of your rights and cannot be used as probable cause for a search on its own.
Q: Is civil asset forfeiture only a Texas problem?
A: No. Texas is among the most aggressive states for civil forfeiture because it allows law enforcement to keep seized funds directly in their own budgets, creating the financial incentive the Institute for Justice has documented. But civil forfeiture laws exist in most states and at the federal level. The specifics of what standard of proof applies, how the burden of proof is allocated, and where the proceeds go vary by state. Some states — New Mexico, North Carolina, and Nebraska among them — have passed meaningful reform requiring a criminal conviction before property can be permanently forfeited. Most states have not. Know the laws in the states your lanes run through.
Q: What is the difference between civil forfeiture and criminal forfeiture?
A: Criminal forfeiture requires a criminal conviction first. After someone is found guilty of a crime, property connected to that crime can be forfeited as part of the sentencing. Civil forfeiture requires no criminal charge, no arrest, and no conviction. The government sues the property directly, the property owner must prove the property’s innocence, and the proceeds go into law enforcement budgets. The Ameal Woods case was civil forfeiture — he was never arrested, never charged, and never convicted of anything. A jury still ruled in 2023 that the money should stay with the county. An appeals court reversed that in 2025. That reversal took six years.
Ameal Woods saved his money, told the truth at a traffic stop, and watched a deputy drive away with his life savings. He was not naive. He was not careless. He was a small business owner trying to grow his operation, who did not know that the constitutional protections he assumed he had did not fully apply in the situation he was in. Six years later, he was still waiting for his money.
The best defense against civil asset forfeiture is not a lawsuit. It is not a lawyer on retainer. It is knowing, before you drive through Texas or any other state with your operating capital in your trunk, exactly what the law allows and exactly what it does not require you to say.
The post The Police Can Seize Your Cash During a Traffic Stop and Keep It Without Charging You With Anything – Every Owner-Operator Needs to Know How This Works appeared first on FreightWaves.
