U.S. v. One 1970 Pontiac GTO, 2-Door Hardtop, 74--3074
Decision Date | 30 January 1976 |
Docket Number | No. 74--3074,74--3074 |
Citation | 529 F.2d 65 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ONE 1970 PONTIAC GTO, 2-DOOR HARDTOP, etc., Defendant, Jesus Ramirez Sanchez, Claimant-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Before DUNIWAY, HUFSTEDLER and CHOY, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from a judgment forfeiting the appellant's automobile under 21 U.S.C. § 881. The appeal raises three issues: (1) Was the evidence sufficient to prove that the vehicle was used to facilitate the sale of a controlled substance? (2) Do 21 U.S.C. § 881 and 19 U.S.C. § 1615 unconstitutionally impose upon the claimant the burden of proof after the Government proves probable cause to forfeit? (3) Must the Government prove probable cause by clear and convincing evidence?
The evidence amply proved that this automobile was used by one Bautista (not the claimant) to further every aspect of the heroin transaction for which Bautista was convicted, except the physical transportation of the contraband. The Government informant paid him for the heroin while both were in the automobile. With exceptions not here pertinent, a vehicle which is used to transport contraband is subject to forfeiture, but the statute does not limit forfeiture to transportation situations. Rather, it subjects to forfeiture all vehicles 'which are used, or are intended for use, to transport, or in any manner to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment of' controlled substances. (21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4).) This automobile was used to help the sale of the contraband; it was not used merely to commute to the scene of criminal activity. (Contrast Howard v. United States (9th Cir. 1970) 423 F.2d 1102.) Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to establish that the vehicle was used 'to facilitate the . . . sale' of contraband within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(4). (United States v. One 1950 Chevrolet 4-Door Sedan (10th Cir. 1954) 215 F.2d 482, 484; see Howard v. United States, supra, 423 F.2d at 1103.)
Appellant's constitutional attack on 21 U.S.C. § 881 and 19 U.S.C. § 1615 is mounted on the premise that forfeiture statutes are essentially criminal; therefore, the shifting of the burden of proof to the claimant denies him due process. Forfeiture statutes are deemed criminal for the purpose of protecting rights secured by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments (Boyd v. United States (1886) 116 U.S. 616, 6 S.Ct. 524, 29 L.Ed. 746), but they are predominantly civil. Despite some dicta attacking their civil characterization (United States v. United States Coin and Currency (1971)401 U.S. 715, 719--20, 91 S.Ct. 1041, 28 L.Ed.2d 434), the Supreme Court has firmly refused to broaden the criminal aspect of forfeiture so as to encompass a wider range of constitutional protections. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. v. $186,416.00 in U.S. Currency
...of Forfeiture Cases, ¶ 11.03[6]. The Ninth Circuit has upheld the constitutionality of Section 1615. United States v. One 1970 Pontiac GTO, 2-Door Hardtop, 529 F.2d 65, 66 (9th Cir.1976). However, the Ninth Circuit has not decided whether CAFRA would be constitutional if it were construed a......
-
Wiren v. Eide
...requirements of 19 U.S.C. § 1615 appears to have been rejected in our recent decision in United States v. One 1970 Pontiac GTO, 2-Door Hardtop, 529 F.2d 65, 66 (9th Cir. 1976). 10 With respect to Tucker Act jurisdiction, the dissenter's conclusion is that "a complaint (which) intermingles a......
-
U.S. v. Marolf
...The Ninth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the burden-shifting provisions of 19 U.S.C. § 1615 in United States v. One 1970 Pontiac GTO 2-Door Hardtop, 529 F.2d 65 (9th Cir. 1976). In recent dictum, the Ninth Circuit has strongly questioned the validity of that decision. United States......
-
U.S. v. $191,910.00 in U.S. Currency
...deprived of his property. Although this Circuit has upheld Sec. 1615 against a due process challenge, see United States v. One 1970 Pontiac GTO, 529 F.2d 65 (9th Cir.1976) (per curiam), judges have increasingly expressed concern with "the ease with which title to property may be forfeited u......
-
Clearing the smoke from the battlefield: understanding congressional intent regarding the innocent owner provision of 21 U.S.C. 881(a) (7).
...U.S.C. [sections] 1615 (1988). The Ninth Circuit ruled this shifting of burdens constitutional in United States v. One 1970 Pontiac GTO, 529 F.2d 65 (9th Cir. 1976). See also United States v. One 1980 Bertram 58' Motor Yacht, 876 F.2d 884 (11 th Cir. 1989); United States v. One 1975 Ford F ......