United States v. One Parcel of

USCA1 Opinion









December 9, 1992
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________


No. 92-1011

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

ONE PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY WITH THE
BUILDING, APPURTENANCES, AND IMPROVEMENTS
KNOWN AS 752 BARK STREET, SWANSEA, MA., ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellants.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge]
___________________

____________________

Before

Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

Marilyn M. Marciarelli on brief pro se.
______________________
A. John Pappalardo, United States Attorney, and Laurie J.
____________________ ___________
Sartorio, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
________


____________________


____________________
























































































district court judgment of civil forfeiture entered in favor of the
Per Curiam. Appellant, Marilyn Marciarelli, has appealed a
__________







has failed to order the trial transcripts. Valedon Martinez v.
_________________
appellant's contentions of district court error, however, because she
government after a two-day trial. We can give no meaningful review of





Hospital Presbiteriano de la Comunidad, Inc., 806 F.2d 1128, 1135 (1st
____________________________________________



1358 (1st Cir. 1985); Fed. R. App. 10(b). On the record before us, we





counsel claim could arise from a civil forfeiture proceeding, but cf.
_______
Similarly, even assuming that an ineffective assistance of



United States v. $250,000 in United States Currency, 808 F.2d 895, 900
_____________ __________________________________
discern neither error nor abuse of discretion.









without the full range of constitutional protections usually
(1st Cir. 1987) (forfeiture statutes are predominantly civil in nature
Cir. 1986); Muniz Ramirez v. Puerto Rico Fire Servs., 757 F.2d 1357,
______________ ________________________















associated with criminal sanctions), we have no basis for reviewing



Accordingly, the district court judgment is affirmed.
_________
appellant's complaints as to her trial counsel's conduct.