USCA1 Opinion
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 96-1170
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
ONE PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY WITH BUILDINGS, APPURTENANCES,
AND IMPROVEMENTS, KNOWN AS 154 MANLEY ROAD, LOCATED IN THE
TOWN OF BURRILLVILLE, RHODE ISLAND, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Mary M. Lisi, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Sheldon Whitehouse, United States Attorney, and Michael P. ___________________ ___________
Iannotti, Assistant United States Attorney, for appellant United ________
States of America.
Ernest Barone for appellees. _____________
____________________
July 30, 1996
____________________
Per Curiam. The government appeals from a decision __________
of the district court dismissing its civil forfeiture claim
as violative of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth
Amendment. United States v. 154 Manley Rd., 908 F. Supp. ______________ ______________
1070, 1083 (D.R.I. 1995). The parties agree, and we are
likewise persuaded, that the judgment below must be vacated
in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in United ______
States v. Ursery, 116 S. Ct. 2134 (1996) (holding that in rem ______ ______
civil forfeitures under 21 U.S.C. 881(a)(7) are neither
"punishment" nor criminal for purposes of the Double Jeopardy
Clause), and the case remanded for further proceedings. See ___
Loc. R. 27.1.
Vacated and remanded. ____________________
-2-