Opinion
2:21-CV-02052
03-03-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF v. $510,000 UNITED STATES CURRENCY DEFENDANT v. OLUWASESAN ABIDAKUN OJO CLAIMANT
OPINION AND ORDER
P.K. HOLMES, III U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Claimant Oluwasesan Abidakun Ojo's motion (Doc. 31) in limine. In his motion, Claimant requests a hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 983(g) to determine if the forfeiture of the Defendant Currency sought in this case violates the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Government has not filed a response but has informed the Court that it does not object to the Court ruling on the motion (Doc. 31) in limine prior to the Government filing its response. The motion will be denied.
18 U.S.C. § 983(g) states that the claimant in a forfeiture action preceding under § 983 “may petition the court to determine whether the forfeiture was constitutionally excessive.” Here, because the case is still pending, no forfeiture has been ordered, and Claimant may not request a hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 983(g) at this time. See, e.g., United States v. Dodge Caravan Grand SE/Sport Van, VIN No. 1B4GP44G2YB7884560 , 387 F.3d 758, 761 (8th Cir. 2004) (noting that an appellate court's review of an excessive fines issue “must be based upon the analysis and record finally developed by the district court” (quoting United States v. One 1970 36.9′ Columbia Sailing Boat, 91 F.3d 1053, 1057 (8th Cir. 1996)); United States v. Various Real & Pers. Props. Located in, or Seized in, Iowa City, No. 04-CV-662, 2006 WL 8437428, at *8 (S.D. Iowa Oct. 18, 2006) (holding that because summary judgment in regard to the defendant property was denied, a 983(g) hearing should be held, if necessary, after the trial).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Claimant's motion (Doc. 31) in limine will be DENIED, without prejudice to its refiling if and when a forfeiture is ordered in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.