United States v. Marshall

by
The Fourth Circuit denied defendant's motion to release substitute assets as part of a government forfeiture in order for defendant to hire appellate counsel of his choice for the appeal of his criminal convictions. The court held that defendant did not have a property interest or title in the credit union funds which he wished to use to pay appellate counsel. The court explained that the Constitution required only that defendant be represented by counsel upon his first appeal of right, and the court would appoint counsel if the forfeiture rendered him indigent or he could not secure pro bono counsel. The court also held that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2 was not a basis upon which to grant defendant's motion because he was fully aware of both the pending forfeiture itself and the exact amount. Furthermore, the Government provided notice in its Bill of Particulars that it intended to obtain the funds in his credit union account through forfeiture as early as two and a half months before trial. View "United States v. Marshall" on Justia Law

Posted in: Criminal Law

Comments are closed.