United States v. Twenty-Five 8mm Films, Etc., and William D. Schmidt

The only substantial issue in this appeal from a forfeiture of obscene merchandise is whether the government caused a fatal delay to occur in the forfeiture proceedings. In United States v. Thirty-Seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363 , 373 — 4, 91 S.Ct. 1400, 1406-07 , 28 L.Ed.2d 822 (1971), the Supreme Court construed 19 U.S.C. § 1305 (a) “to require intervals of no more than 14 days from seizure of the goods to the institution of judicial proceedings for their forfeiture and no longer than 60 days from the filing of the action to final decision in the district court.... ” This forfeiture consumed 75 days.

Fourteen days were lost because Schmidt filed a pro se claim for the seized property with the district court, but did not know that he had to serve a copy of his claim on the government. Accordingly, the government did not learn of Schmidt’s claim until it moved for a default judgment. The district court concluded before trial that Schmidt’s failure to serve the government delayed the forfeiture proceedings by fourteen days. At trial, three days were lost because of a holiday recess and because a juror became ill. When the court reconvened to receive the verdict, 75 days had…