United States v. Bajakajian case brief

United States v. Bajakajian case brief summary
524 U.S. 321 (1998)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Petitioner, the United States, filed a petition for a writ of certiorari that sought review of the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed a trial court's judgment that the forfeiture of the entire $ 357,144 that respondent was carrying when he failed to report currency over $ 10,000, as required by 31 U.S.C.S. § 5316(a), would have violated the Excessive Fines Clause of U.S. Constitutional Amendment VIII.

CASE FACTS

• Respondent attempted to leave the United States without reporting, as required by 31 U.S.C.S. § 5316(a), that he was transporting more than $ 10,000 in currency. 
• Respondent pleaded guilty to a charge of having failed to report as required by § 5316(a)(1)(a), and with having done so willfully, in violation of 31 U.S.C.S. § 5322(a). 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

• The trial court found that respondent had failed to report the money because of fear stemming from cultural differences. 
• Although the trial court found that the entire $ 357,144 was subject to forfeiture under the authority of 18 U.S.C.S. § 982(a)(1), it instead ordered a much smaller forfeiture because it found that a forfeiture of the entire amount would violate the Excessive Fines Clause of U.S. Constitutional Amendment VIII. The United States appealed the trial court's judgment. 

DISCUSSION

• The judgment of the court below was affirmed on appeal. 
• The court agreed that the forfeiture of the entire $ 357,144 that respondent failed to declare would violate the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause because the full forfeiture of respondent's currency would have been grossly disproportional to the gravity of his offense.

CONCLUSION
The judgment of the court below, which affirmed a finding that the forfeiture of the entire $ 357,144 that respondent was carrying when he failed to report, as required by federal law, that he was transporting more than $ 10,000 in currency would have violated the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause, was affirmed because such a forfeiture would have been grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense.



Recommended Supplements for Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedure: Examples & Explanations, Sixth Edition
Emanuel Law Outline: Criminal Procedure