United States v. One Parcel of Land

USCA1 Opinion

      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

                 United States Court of Appeals

                     For the First Circuit











No. 97-2197



                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                       Plaintiff, Appellee,



                                v.



                    ONE PARCEL OF LAND, ETC.,

                       Defendant, Appellee.







                          EDWIN COLON,

                     Defendant, Appellant.







          APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



               FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



        [Hon. Nathaniel M. Gorton, U.S. District Judge]







                             Before



                     Torruella, Chief Judge,

               Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges.







     Edwin Colon on brief pro se.

     Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Patrick M.

Hamilton, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.











July 10, 1998













            Per Curiam.  Pro se appellant Edwin Colon appeals a

    district court judgment which denied his motion for relief from

    a final judgment compelling the forfeiture of his former

    residence at 13 Maplewood Drive in North Grafton,

    Massachusetts.  Appellant maintains that the forfeiture was

    unfair because he did not receive notice of the forfeiture

    proceeding until the government served him with a copy of the

    court's final judgment on April 12, 1996.

              This court has thoroughly reviewed the record and the

    parties' briefs on appeal.  We conclude that the district court

    did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant relief.  See,

    e.g., United States v. Real Property, 135 F.3d 1312, 1315-16

    (9th Cir. 1998); United States v. Clark, 84 F.3d 378, 381 (10th

    Cir. 1996).  We further reject appellant's contention that

    because the government failed to use his inmate registration

    number from the Plymouth County Correctional Facility in

    addressing its notices, and further erroneously included the

    middle initial "A" in its addresses, the notices were

    constitutionally inadequate.  See, e.g., Bye v. United States,

    105 F.3d 865, 857 (2d Cir. 1997)(per curiam); United States v.

    51 Pieces of Real Property, 17 F.3d 1306, 1317 & n.11 (10th

    Cir. 1994).  Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

    affirmed.  See Local Rule 27.1.