United States v. $180,893.00 U.S. Currency

MEMORANDUM ***

Appellant Steven Warden appeals the district court’s grant of the Government’s Rule 56 motion for summary judgment in the underlying forfeiture action. Warden argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for the government because the forfeiture constituted an excessive fine in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment functions to limit the power of the government to extract payments, whether in cash or in kind, as punishment for an offense. Austin v. United States, 509 U.S. 602, 610 , 113 S.Ct. 2801, 2805 , 125 L.Ed.2d 488 (1993). To implicate the Excessive Fines Clause, the government action must constitute punishment. Id. Forfeiture generally and statutory in rem forfeiture in particular, have historically been understood, at least partly, as punishment. Id. at 618 , 113 S.Ct. 2801 . The forfeiture action in this case was brought pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881 (a)(7). The Court in Austin examined whether or not forfeiture under this statute was punitive in nature. The United States Supreme Court held in pertinent part:

Id. at 622, 113 S.Ct. 2801 . (citations and…