UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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