United States v. Davis

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6695 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BERESFORD DAVIS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR- 98-01-PJM, CA-98-4155-PJM) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 25, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Beresford Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Beresford Davis appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for return of property under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e). Review of the record reveals that Davis’ property was seized by the Secret Service for forfeiture upon suspicion of its use in criminal activity. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b)(5) specifically provides that Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e) cannot be used to challenge a civil forfeiture. Moreover, district courts lack jurisdiction to address claims of ownership of property during the pendency of administrative forfeiture proceedings, and may review completed forfeitures only to determine compliance with due process and pro- cedural requirements. See Ibarra v. United States, 120 F.3d 472, 474-76 (4th Cir. 1997). Davis raises no such due process or pro- cedural challenge. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2