DOJ Publication
CIVIL AND CRIMINAL FORFEITURE PROCEDURE

Scanned and turned into web pages by Forfeiture Endangers American Rights
updated December 24, 2004

Table of Contents
Part III - Excessive Fines

TEXT OF PART III -  in PDF format

I. Criminal and Civil Forfeitures Are limited by the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment - - - - - - - - - - -1


II. Bajakajian Applies to Civil Forfeiture - - - - - - - - - - 1


III. Bajakajian Applies to Criminal Forfeiture Beyond Drugs and Money Laundering - - - 2


IV. Corpus Delicti Property /Instrumentalities - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2


V. CTR and CMIR Cases - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3


VI. Bulk Cash Smuggling - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4


VII. Money Laundering Cases - - - - - - - - - - - - 5

A. Laundered proceeds - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5

B. Other property involved - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5

C. Sting cases - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6


VIII. Proceeds Cases - - - - - - - - - - - - 7

A. The Eighth Amendment does not apply to the forfeiture of proceeds, or if it does, the forfeiture is never "grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense" - - - - - - - - 7

B. Pre-Bajakajian, all courts held that the forfeiture of proceeds is never excessive - - - - 7

C. Joint and several liability - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8


IX. Facilitating Property - - - - - - - - - - - - -9

A. Cases using the sentencing guidelines to measure the gravity of the offense - - - - 9

B. Cases using the maximum statutory fine as the measure of the gravity of the offense - - - - 10

C. Other courts continue to incorporate various other factors into the analysis - - - - 10

D. The personal characteristics of the property owner should be irrelevant - - - - - 11

E. Facilitating property/third parties - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12


X. RICO Cases - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13


XI. Excessive Fines Analysis in Non-Forfeiture Cases - - - - - - 13


XII. Pre-Bajakajian Cases Applying Austin to Facilitating Property - - - -13


XIII. Property That Appreciates in Value - - - - - - - - - 18


XIV. Eighth Amendment Procedure - - - - - - - - - - 18

A. Standing to raise Eighth Amendment claim - - - - - - - - - - - 18

B. Defendant has burden of making threshold showing - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18

C. The district court is required to make findings - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19

D. Eighth Amendment challenge may not be raised pretrial - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19

E. Claimant must raise Eighth Amendment claim in response to motion for summary judgment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19

F. Motion for summary judgment based on Eighth Amendment violation - - - - - 20

G. Defendant may not use section 2255 to challenge civil forfeiture - - - - - - 20

H. Eighth Amendment issue is for the court, not the jury - - - - - - - - - 20

I. Court must mitigate forfeiture to avoid Eighth Amendment violation - - - - - - 21

J. Punishments imposed by the state in parallel proceedings - - - - - - - -21

K. Collateral estoppel - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21

L. CMIR cases - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -21


XV. Retroactive Application of Bajakajian - - - - - - - - - - - 22

A. Bajakajian does not apply retroactively - - - - - - - - - - - 22

B. Rule 60(b) motions - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22


XVI. Discovery on Eighth Amendment Issue - - - - - - - - 22