U.S. v. $26,660 in U.S. Currency, 198

Citation777 F.2d 111
Decision Date21 November 1985
Docket NumberD,No. 198,198
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. $26,660 IN U.S. CURRENCY (Vincent Caci, Claimant), Defendant-Appellant. ocket 85-6154.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)

Michael H. Ranzenhofer, Buffalo, N.Y. (Mattar, D'Agostino, Kogler & Runfola, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Martin Littlefield, (Asst. U.S. Atty. for the W.D.N.Y., Buffalo N.Y., Salvatore R. Martoche, U.S. Atty. for the W.D.N.Y., Joseph M. Guerra, III, Asst. U.S. Atty., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.

Before FEINBERG, Chief Judge, LUMBARD and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Vincent Caci, appellant-claimant in this in rem forfeiture action, appeals from an order of Chief Judge John T. Curtin of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York ordering the forfeiture of $26,660 to the United States government. In 1983, Caci crossed the Canadian border into the United States carrying that amount in American currency. At the border, officers of the United States Customs Service requested that Caci complete a form that asked whether he was carrying over $5,000 in currency. He filled out the form, answering this question in the negative. Customs officers then searched Caci, discovered the $26,660 on his person and seized the money. Caci was indicted and convicted under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001 for willfully making false statements in completing the Customs form. This Court affirmed the conviction by order, and the Supreme Court denied appellant's petition for certiorari. 751 F.2d 372, (2nd Cir.) cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 594, 83 L.Ed.2d 703 (1984). The government subsequently sought civil forfeiture of the currency pursuant to 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5317(b) (now Sec. 5317(c)). In the district court, Caci admitted that he had transported money from Canada into the United States. He attempted to show, however, that at the time he entered the United States he had been unaware of his obligation to report the currency. Judge Curtin nevertheless granted the government summary judgment and ordered the currency forfeited. This appeal followed.

At the time Caci crossed the border, 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5316(a) provided that any person who "knowingly" transports currency in excess of $5,000 into the United States must file a report with the Secretary of the Treasury, and 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5317(b) provided for forfeiture of such currency when the person importing it failed to file the required report. The parties dispute whether awareness of the reporting requirement is an element of a civil forfeiture action brought under section 5317. Authority exists on both sides of this question, which is as yet undecided by this court. Compare United States v. $5393, 583 F.Supp. 1447 (E.D.N.Y.1984) (awareness not required) and United States v. $4,255,625.39, 528 F.Supp. 969 (S.D.Fla.1981) (same) with United States v. $24,900, 770 F.2d 1530 (11th Cir.1985) (awareness required). Cf. United States v. $6,700, 615 F.2d 1, 3 (1st Cir.1980) (noting in context of estate's claim to currency carried into United States by administrator that "[t]he forfeiture provisions here are straightforward ... forfeiture is not tied to or dependent upon the wrongdoing of the owner of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • US v. US CURRENCY IN AMOUNT OF $145,139.00, CV 91-4949.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • August 12, 1992
    ...fined. The court granted summary judgment for the government and the money was forfeited. Similarly, in United States v. $26,660 in United States Currency, 777 F.2d 111 (2d Cir.1985), the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment forfeiting money seized at the b......
  • U.S. v. One Hundred Twenty-Two Thousand Forty-Three Dollars ($122,043.00) In U.S. Currency
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • September 9, 1986
    ...is holding that proof of knowledge of the reporting requirement is not required for forfeiture. See United States v. $26,600 in U.S. Currency, 777 F.2d 111, 112 (2d Cir.1985) (per curiam). The Eleventh Circuit has recently required a showing of knowledge. In United States v. One (1) Lot of ......
  • US v. US CURRENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,481.00
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • June 29, 1990
    ...in this civil action to forfeit the currency. See United States v. Podell, 572 F.2d 31 (2d Cir.1978); United States v. $26,660 In United States Currency, 777 F.2d 111 (2d Cir.1985). There is, therefore, no genuine issue of material fact with regard to Mr. Ojo's claim and the Plaintiff is en......
  • U.S. v. $359,500 in U.S. Currency, 827
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • September 8, 1987
    ...of civil forfeiture under Sec. 5317(c) is an issue of first impression in this circuit. See United States v. $26,660 in United States Currency, 777 F.2d 111, 112 (2d Cir.1985) (per curiam). The view of the majority of the courts that have considered the issue is that actual knowledge is not......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT