USA v. LazarenkoMemorandum in OppositionN.D. Cal.August 5, 20131 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DENNIS P. RIORDAN (SBN 69320) DONALD M. HORGAN (SBN 121547) RIORDAN & HORGAN 523 Octavia Street San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone: (415) 431-3472 Attorneys for Defendant PAVEL LAZARENKO UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. PAVEL IVANOVICH LAZARENKO, Defendant. ____________________________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CR-00-0284 CRB DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO GOVERNMENT’S APPLICATION TO TAKE POST-CONVICTION DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR BRIEFING SCHEDULE Date: TBA Time: TBA Courtroom: Judge Charles R. Breyer On August 2, 2013 the government filed a pleading entitled “Ex Parte Application of the United States To Take Post-Conviction Discovery Pursuant To 21 U.S.C. § 853(m) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(3).” Defendant Pavel Lazarenko hereby opposes that motion and requests that it be heard and decided on a schedule that will permit full and adversarial briefing. The government seeks leave to conduct discovery by deposition and subpoena, apparently without limitation, not only against Mr. Lazarenko, but against unnamed third parties. The ostensible basis for doing so are orders in this matter for forfeiture of over twenty two million dollars and for a fine in the amount of nine million dollars. Both orders are based on Mr. Lazarenko’s 2004 convictions for eight money laundering offenses occurring no later than 1 Case3:00-cr-00284-CRB Document1609 Filed08/05/13 Page1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 September of 1998. Mr. Lazarenko was subject to confinement in one form or another between his arrival in this country in February 1999 and 2013, when he completed his prison sentence on the aforementioned money laundering convictions. As the government is well aware, all proceeds from Mr. Lazarenko’s money laundering offenses, along with a great deal of additional funds, were seized by the government over a decade ago and are presently the subject of ongoing civil forfeiture proceedings in federal court in the District of Columbia in which the government is the plaintiff. The government’s discovery motion raises substantial legal issues and should be decided only after full briefing and oral argument. Mr. Lazarenko therefore asks that the Court establish the following briefing schedule: Lazarenko’s brief in opposition is to be filed on Friday, August 23rd; the government may reply by Friday, August 30th; with the matter to be heard on the Court’s criminal calendar on September 11th at 2:30 p.m. Defendant Lazarenko is, of course, prepared to argue the government’s motion on another date if that is more convenient for the Court. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated, the Court should issue a briefing schedule in this matter. Dated: August 5, 2013 Respectfully submitted, By /s/ Dennis P. Riordan Dennis P. Riordan Attorney for Defendant PAVEL LAZARENKO 2 Case3:00-cr-00284-CRB Document1609 Filed08/05/13 Page2 of 2
