Robinson v. Hanrahan

holding that a notice of forfeiture sent to an owner’s home was inadequate when the state had knowledge that the owner was in prison | holding that notice of forfeiture proceedings sent to a vehicle owner’s address of record was inadequate where the state knew that the property owner was in prison | holding that notice of a property forfeiture was inadequate despite compliance with Illinois’ forfeiture statute because the State knew that the appellant was incarcerated at the time the notice was sent | holding that mailing that the government knew would not accomplish notice was insufficient | holding that service regarding state foreclosure proceedings sent to the last known address of a prisoner was not “reasonably calculated” to reach the prisoner when the State knew that the prisoner was not at the address to which the notice was mailed | holding notice of forfeiture sent to address State knew to be inaccurate or defective insufficient | holding notice of forfeiture sent to address State knew to be inaccurate or defective insufficient | holding notice of forfeiture sent to address State knew to be inaccurate or defective insufficient | holding notice of forfeiture proceedings sent to a vehicle owner’s home address was inadequate when the State knew that the property owner was in prison | holding notice inadequate when “the State knew that [the owner] was not at the address to which the notice was mailed and, moreover, knew also that [the owner] could not get to that address since he was at that very time confined” | due process violated when forfeiture notice mailed to the home of .a defendant who was in jail throughout the proceeding | notice of state forfeiture proceedings was inadequate when mailed to claimant’s home while claimant was imprisoned | "Mullane held that notice by publication is not sufficient with respect to an individual whose name and address are known or easily ascertainable.” | notice by certified mail to automobile owner's home violated due process in forfeiture proceedings where the state knew that the owner was being held in the county jail | state forfeiture proceedings invalid where notice was sent to appellant’s home though state knew appellant was in jail | due process violated when forfeiture notice mailed to home of defendant who was in jail throughout proceeding | notice sent to an address listed with the secretary of state was insufficient because the appellant’s incarceration provided the state knowledge that he would not receive mail at his residence | where state knew appellant was in jail, mailing notice of forfeiture to his home was not reasonably calculated to afford him notice of proceedings | deprivation of due process of law when state mailed notice to claimant's home despite knowledge that claimant was in prison | “the State knew that appellant was not at the address to which the notice was mailed” (emphasis added) | “Mullane held that notice by publication is not sufficient with respect to an individual whose name and address are known or easily ascertainable.” | notice of forfeiture procedure mailed to an address known by the state to be inaccurate was defective | " Mullane held that notice by publication is not sufficient with respect to an individual whose name and address are known or easily ascertainable." | “notice must be reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections” | notice by certified mail to automobile owner’s home violated due process in forfeiture proceedings where the state knew that the owner was being held in the county jail | where the government is aware that an interested party does not reside at the address, but relies only on notice sent to that address, such notice is not reasonably calculated under the circumstances | service in state foreclosure proceedings sent to a prisoner’s last known address was not reasonably calculated to reac