One 1960 Oldsmobile Convertible Coupe v. United States, 19480.

• Decision Date: 28 December 1966
• Docket Number: No. 19480.,19480.
• Citation: 125 US App. DC 305,371 F.2d 958
• Parties: ONE 1960 OLDSMOBILE CONVERTIBLE COUPE, Serial No. 608W-02641, Registered Title Owner, Edgar Dwight Bass, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit

125 US App. DC 305, 371 F.2d 958 (1966)

ONE 1960 OLDSMOBILE CONVERTIBLE COUPE, Serial No. 608W-02641, Registered Title Owner, Edgar Dwight Bass, Jr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 19480.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued December 8, 1966.

Decided December 28, 1966.

Mr. E. Riley Casey, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Richard P. McLaughlin, Washington, D. C. (both appointed by this court), was on the brief, for appellant.

Miss Carol Garfiel, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. David G. Bress, U. S. Atty., and Frank Q. Nebeker, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before WILBUR K. MILLER, Senior Circuit Judge, and DANAHER and TAMM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Edgar Dwight Bass, Jr., registered title owner of the automobile involved in this proceeding, entered a plea of guilty to one count of an indictment charging a violation of the Federal narcotics laws and was duly sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Thereafter, the present proceedings were initiated by the United States to effect the forfeiture of the automobile under 49 U.S.C. § 782.¹ After pretrial proceedings, a hearing at which Bass was represented by court-appointed counsel was conducted in the district court. Following the taking of testimony, the district court judge approved a finding of fact that the subject automobile had been used in violation of pertinent statutes and ordered the forfeiture of the car.

The single narrow issue requiring our discussion is whether the district court erred in refusing to issue — at the request of Bass — subpoenas for two witnesses. This question was previously before a panel of this court after a judge of the district court, in a prehearing motion, declined to issue subpoenas at Government expense because, "there is no provision for subpoenaing witnesses at Government expense in a civil case." On January 14, 1965, we ruled that on the record then before the court this denial "was not clearly an abuse of discretion."

During the trial of the forfeiture case, the then presiding judge stated he would issue the requested subpoenas, provided the testimony of the witnesses would be relevant. Ultimately, and after proffers of the testimony of the two proposed witnesses, the trial judge declined to issue the subpoenas. Despite some ambiguity in the record, we conclude that the district judge did not commit reversible error. We note that the most obvious witness on behalf of Bass' claim...