During the 1980s and 1990s, Federal laws changed to encourage the use of asset forfeiture by State and local authorities in their efforts to combat criminal activities. Asset forfeiture involves the right of law enforcement authorities to confiscate assets that are in the possession of or utilized by criminals or criminal suspects. The widespread use of asset forfeiture became controversial in the face of allegations of abuse. This study represents one of the first attempts to understand the decisionmaking process regarding the use of asset forfeiture laws. The analysis focused on the types of assets confiscated, the kind of legal authority used to carrying out asset forfeiture, and on the individuals involved in the decisionmaking process within the greater Cincinnati area. Data were drawn from a 2002 survey of 70 State and local law enforcement agencies in the greater Cincinnati area; survey questions focused on asset forfeiture and policing priorities. The results indicated that asset forfeiture was used rather commonly in the area, although the use of asset forfeiture laws did not have a significant impact on local policing priorities. Overall, local authorities used either a criminal forfeiture statute or a court-imposed forfeiture to confiscate assets. The criminal court process may be favored because it allows jurisdictions to avoid divulging the value of assets confiscated. There was no evidence of abuse of the forfeiture laws in Cincinnati. Tables, note, references