United States v. Jorge E. Baena

103 F.3d 141 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jorge E. BAENA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-30367. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 4, 1996. Decided Dec. 05, 1996. Before: WRIGHT, BRUNETTI, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Jorge E. Baena appeals the denial of his motion to set aside the administrative forfeiture of money seized after his arrest for possession of cocaine. Baena contends that the government provided insufficient notice of the forfeiture proceedings. We reverse the district court's order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this decision. 3 Baena filed a Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e) motion for return of property and a motion to set aside the forfeiture of the property on the basis of insufficient notice. The district court denied the Rule 41(e) motion without prejudice and directed that it would consider the issues when it ruled on the…