United States of America v. Eight Thousand Six Hundred ($8600) Dollars in United States Currency

Filing 3

OPINION. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 9/26/2008. (dmn)

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. ) 2:08cv702-MHT EIGHT THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED ) (WO) ($8,600) DOLLARS IN UNITED ) STATES CURRENCY, ) ) Defendant. ) OPINION This civil-forfeiture proceeding, initiated pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 801(a)(6), States of is before the court for on a plaintiff United America's request warrant to arrest in rem $ 8,600 seized during a traffic stop. Rule G(3)(b) of the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims provides two avenues for the issuance of an arrest warrant in rem in a civilforfeiture proceeding. a warrant if the The clerk of the court may issue "is in the government's property possession, custody or control." & Mar. Cl. G(3)(b)(i). Supp. R. Certain Adm. Alternatively, the court may issue the warrant upon a finding of probable cause. Supp. R. Certain Adm. & Mar. Cl. G(3)(b)(ii). Because the court is not convinced that there is probable cause based on the information submitted in the government's complaint, the warrant cannot issue under Rule G(3)(b)(ii). However, because the clerk of the court need not make a probable cause finding before issuing a warrant when, as here, the property is in the government's custody, the warrant may issue under Rule G(3)(b)(i). As a matter of policy, the clerk of court of the Middle District of Alabama does not issue warrants pursuant to Rule G(3)(b)(i), but refers requests for such warrants to the court. Accordingly, the court will issue the warrant pursuant to Rule G(3)(b)(i). DONE, this is 26th day of September, 2008. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?