Judge Charles Siragusa
Suspecting Connolly of marijuana possession police searched his home under warrant. In addition to drugs, police seized $10,300 in cash and bank statements. A warrant to search the account reference in the bank statements led to seizure of $15,232. In response to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) notices of seizure, Connolly submitted verified claims to the seized money’s ownership. The DEA referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney whose in rem complaint initiated civil forfeiture and an in rem arrest warrant’s issuance. Despite responding to the government’s notices of forfeiture action under Rule G(4)(b) of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions, Connolly did not “file a claim where the action is pending.” The court stuck Connolly’s answer, rejecting his claims that his notarized administrative claim provided standing as it included all information required by Supplemental Rule G(5). In rejecting Connolly’s claim “the government” had actual notice, the court noted he referred to the DEA and U.S. Attorney’s office as one entity. Discussing United States v. $5,227.00 U.S. Currency, the court found Connolly did not file the requisite claim before the court and offered no basis for failing to do so.
