file a forfeiture proceeding in state court related to the currency, the claimants are entitled to a return of the currency. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the cause to that court with instructions to enter a judgment in favor of the claimants. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. THOMPSON, P.J., and PITTMAN, BRYAN, and MOORE, JJ., concur. 1 . In Green, the city of Montgomery was identified as the only appellee. However, the summary judgment at issue in Green, which this court reversed, was actually entered in favor of all the defendants. 2 . The State, not the City, is the party with standing to initiate a forfeiture action pursuant to § 20-2-93, Ala.Code 1975. See State v. Property at 2018 Rainbow Drive, 740 So.2d 1025, 1027-28 (Ala.1999) (<HOLDING>). 3 . The claimants couch part of their
holding a sentencing court is not obligated to expressly weigh on the record each of the factors set out in  3553a holding that  20293 incorporates the procedures set out in  284286 et seq alacode 1975 specifying that a drugrelated forfeiture action is to be filed in the name of the state holding a forfeiture provision to be a civil action despite its codification in the states criminal code holding that the absence of legitimate income supports the finding of probable cause in a forfeiture action holding that the district court properly exercised jurisdiction over a criminal forfeiture action where a state court in a related state court forfeiture proceeding had in personam jurisdiction over the same currency subject to forfeiture