Filed: Sep. 13, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 13, 2019
Summary: [PROPOSED] ORDER OF FORFEITURE JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the United States' Motion for Entry of an Order of Forfeiture seeking to forfeit, to the United States, Defendant Pradyumna Kumar Samal's interest in the following property: • A money judgment in the amount of $1,625,532.84, representing property obtained by the Defendant that constitutes, or is derived from, proceeds traceable to a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 13
Summary: [PROPOSED] ORDER OF FORFEITURE JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the United States' Motion for Entry of an Order of Forfeiture seeking to forfeit, to the United States, Defendant Pradyumna Kumar Samal's interest in the following property: • A money judgment in the amount of $1,625,532.84, representing property obtained by the Defendant that constitutes, or is derived from, proceeds traceable to a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 134..
More
[PROPOSED]
ORDER OF FORFEITURE
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the United States' Motion for Entry of an Order of Forfeiture seeking to forfeit, to the United States, Defendant Pradyumna Kumar Samal's interest in the following property:
• A money judgment in the amount of $1,625,532.84, representing property obtained by the Defendant that constitutes, or is derived from, proceeds traceable to a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1341 (Mail Fraud).
The Court, having reviewed the papers and pleadings filed in this matter, hereby FINDS entry of an Order of Forfeiture is appropriate because:
• The Defendant was charged in a Second Superseding Information with offenses including Mail Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, (Dkt. No. 47);
• The Second Superseding Information included forfeiture allegations providing notice that, upon the Defendant's conviction of the charged Mail Fraud offense, the United States would seek the forfeiture of any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to such offense, including but not limited to a judgment for a sum of money representing such property (See Dkt. No. 47, at 8-10);
• The Defendant pleaded guilty to the charged Mail Fraud offense, (Dkt. No. 51, ¶¶ 2, 10);
• The evidence in the record, including information contained within the Plea Agreement and the Presentence Investigation Report, has established the requisite nexus between the above-described money judgment and the offense of conviction, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure ("Fed. R. Crim. P.") 32.2(b)(1)(B); and
• No ancillary proceeding is required to the extent that the forfeiture consists of a money judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(c)(1).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COURT ORDERS:
1) Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the Defendant's interest in the above-identified sum of money is fully and finally forfeited, in its entirety, to the United States;
2) No right, title, or interest in this sum of money exists in any party other than the United States;
3) Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(4)(A)-(B), this order will become final as to the Defendant at the time he is sentenced, it will be made part of the sentence, and it will be included in the judgment;
4) Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(e), in order to satisfy, in whole or in part, this money judgment the United States may move to amend this order, at any time, to substitute property having a value not to exceed $1,625,532.84; and
5) The Court will retain jurisdiction in this case for the purpose of enforcing this order.
