USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________

No. 97-1220

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, Appellee,

v.

ONE 1989 23 FT. WELLCRAFT MOTOR VESSEL, ETC., ET AL.,

Defendants.
______________________

EUSEBIO ESCOBAR-DE-JESUS,

Intervenor, Appellant.
____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

[Hon. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez, U.S. District Judge]

___________________
____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge,

___________
Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________

Eusebio Escobar-De-Jesus on brief pro se.

________________________
Guillermo Gil,
______________

United

States

Attorney,

Miguel A. Fernand
___________________

Assistant

United States

Javier Santos Mimoso,

____________________

Attorney, Chief,

Civil

Division, and

Assistant United States Attorney,

appellees.

____________________

SEPTEMBER 30, 1997

____________________

on brief

J
_

Per Curiam.
__________

We have reviewed

the briefs submitted

the parties and the record on appeal.

of

the district

court, for

court's Opinion and

We affirm the judgment

the reasons stated

Order dated December

Opinion and Order dated

by

in district

12, 1995, and

its

We add only

the

October 17, 1996.

following.

Escobar claims that the seizure of his property violates

the eighth amendment prohibition against excessive fines.

We

do not

to

now decide whether

forfeitures under 21 U.S.C.

the forfeiture here was not

the real

property forfeited

Escobar conspired

to import

the eighth

amendment applies

881(a)(6), but even if it does,

"excessive," given the value

and the

value

and/or possess

of the

of

cocaine

with intent

to

distribute.

Escobar

argues the district

issue a writ

of habeas corpus ad testificandum

______________________________

to attend his trial.

court

did

court erred in

not

substantially

discuss

whether

F.3d

205, 208

not adequately

(5th Cir.

explain how

In

and conclude

even

if

the

evidence

that

since

overwhelming.

and Order, the district

Escobar's

have been helpful.

harmless,

to allow him

presence

further the resolution of the case.

v. Whitley, 93
___________

Escobar did

In its Opinion

failing to

1996).

would

Latiolais
_________

Even so,

his presence

would

addition, we have reviewed the record

error

was

committed,

against

Escobar

it

was

was

We

have reviewed the

follows.

1)

remaining issues and

Federal Rule of

Criminal Procedure 7 does not

require the government to combine criminal

forfeiture

rejected.

findings

evidence.

conclude as

prosecutions with

actions, so Escobar's argument to the contrary is

2)

of

We find no clear error in the district court's

fact, as

3)

the

Escobar's

findings were

supported

arguments that the filing

by the

of this

action

violated principles

estoppel,

and

that

lienholders violated

appeal.

4)

His

the

due

of res

judicata and

settlements

with

process, were

not

allegations

that the

improperly

with regard

missing is

unsupported by the record.

position with

to additional

regard to

the district

fashioning a remedy for the

agreement with the result.

Affirmed.
_________

third

party

preserved

government

property

5)

collateral

for

acted

he says

is

While we take no

court's reasoning

in

due process violation, we are in

-3-