Case ID: or-app_138/html/0371-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Submitted on record and briefs August 25,
    affirmed December 27, 1995,
    petition for review denied May 28, 1996 (323 Or 265)
    CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON, Respondent, v. 1979 280ZX, DATSUN, Oregon License No. TCL 860, VIN No. HGS130122481, Defendant in rem, and ROBERT HASH, Appellant.
    
    (16-93-05896; CA A87776)
    908 P2d 849
    Robert Hash, pro se, filed the briefs for appellant.
    F. Douglas Harcleroad, District Attorney, and Melinda C. Broome, Assistant District Attorney, filed the brief for respondent.
    Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Hasel-ton, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Appellant’s property was forfeited in a proceeding that followed his criminal conviction. At the forfeiture proceeding, he claimed that the forfeiture was unconstitutional as an excessive fine/punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Austin v. United States, 509 US_, 113 S Ct 2801, 125 L Ed 2d 488 (1993). On appeal, he has abandoned that argument. Instead, he argues that the forfeiture proceeding violated the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy and relies on, inter alia, U.S. v. $405,089.23 U.S. Currency, 33 F3d 1210 (9th Cir 1994). Appellant did not make that argument to the trial court, and we will not consider it for the first time on appeal.

Affirmed.