## Facts

- The United States brought an in rem civil forfeiture action seeking forfeiture of a tractor and attached trailer owned by claimant Karapet Shimshiryan under 49 U.S.C. § 80303.
- On September 6, 2002, after delivering lawful produce in New York, Shimshiryan drove the tractor-trailer through Virginia.
- Shimshiryan purchased approximately twenty-three half cases of cigarettes (about 282,400 cigarettes) at a tobacco outlet and loaded them into the tractor’s cab, not the trailer.
- The cigarettes lacked required state tax stamps and qualified as contraband cigarettes under federal law.
- Shimshiryan intended to transport the cigarettes to California and then ship them abroad for resale.
- In a separate criminal case, Shimshiryan pleaded guilty to transporting contraband cigarettes in violation of § 80303.
- The forfeiture case proceeded to a bench trial limited to whether the tractor and trailer were forfeitable and whether forfeiture would be constitutionally excessive.

## Issues

1. Whether the trailer, which did not contain the contraband, was “involved in” the offense under 49 U.S.C. § 80303 and “substantially connected” to the offense under CAFRA, 18 U.S.C. § 983(c)(3).
2. Whether forfeiture of the tractor (and/or trailer) was barred by constitutional limits, including the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause.

## Decision

- The court ordered forfeiture of the tractor to the United States because it transported the contraband cigarettes and was substantially connected to the offense.
- The court denied forfeiture of the trailer because the government did not prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the trailer was substantially connected to the offense or otherwise “involved in” it.
- The court rejected the claimant’s constitutional objections and held that forfeiture of the tractor was not constitutionally excessive.

## Legal Principles

- In a civil forfeiture action governed by CAFRA, the government must prove forfeiture by a preponderance of the evidence. 18 U.S.C. § 983(c)(1).
- When forfeiture is based on use of property to commit or facilitate an offense, the government must prove a “substantial connection” between the property and the offense. 18 U.S.C. § 983(c)(3).
- Under 49 U.S.C. § 80303, a vehicle may be forfeited if it was “involved in” transporting, concealing, or possessing contraband cigarettes; attachment to an involved vehicle does not by itself establish involvement of each component.
- A trailer is not forfeitable merely because it is physically connected to a forfeitable tractor; the government must show the trailer itself materially furthered the offense, not an incidental or attenuated relation.
- Civil forfeiture is constrained by the Eighth Amendment; forfeiture is unconstitutional only if grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense.

## Conclusion

The court applied CAFRA’s substantial-connection requirement to evaluate the tractor and trailer separately, forfeiting the tractor that carried contraband cigarettes while refusing to forfeit the attached trailer absent proof that the trailer itself materially furthered the offense, and it held the tractor forfeiture was not an excessive fine.


United States v. One 1998 Tractor, 288 F. Supp. 2d 710 (W.D. Va. 2003)