Republic National Bank of Miami v. United States (506 U.S. 80)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided December 14, 1992 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 506 U.S. 80 · 113 S. Ct. 554
- Decided
- December 14, 1992
- Term
- October Term 1992
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Blackmun
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Blackmun announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, and IV, and an opinion with respect to Part III . The issue in this case is whether the Court of Appeals may continue to exercise jurisdiction in an in rem civil forfeiture proceeding after the res, then in the form of cash, is removed by the United States Marshal from the judicial district and deposited in the United States Treasury. 1 — I In February 1988, the Government instituted an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida seeking forfeiture of a specified single-family residence in Coral Gables. The complaint alleged that Indalecio Iglesias was the true owner of the property; that he had purchased it with proceeds of narcotics trafficking; and that the property was subject to forfeiture to the United States pursuant to § 511(a)(6) of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, as amended, 92 Stat. 3777, 21 U. S. C. § 881(a)(6). A warrant for the arrest of the property was issued, and the United States Marshal seized it. In response to the complaint, Thule Holding Corporation, a Panama corporation, filed a claim asserting that it was the owner of the res in question. Petitioner Republic National Bank of Miami (Bank) filed a claim asserting a lien interest of $800,000 in the property under a…
Excerpt of a 24,171-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.