From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Auston

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Apr 12, 2013
Case No. 3:04cr130 (2) (S.D. Ohio Apr. 12, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 3:04cr130 (2)

04-12-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD AUSTON, Defendant.


JUDGE WALTER H. RICE


DECISION AND ENTRY ENTERING MONEY JUDGMENT AGAINST

DEFENDANT AND ORDERING FORFEITURE OF ALL ITEMS LISTED ON

ATTACHMENT "B" SAVE AND EXCEPTING ITEMS 1 AND 4 THEREIN;

JUDGMENT TO ENTER ACCORDINGLY

On February 14, 2007, the Government sought forfeiture of the assets listed in the Superseding Indictment and a $10 million money judgment against Defendant, based upon his conviction of Count One of the Superseding Indictment (Doc. #271). Then-counsel for Defendant filed a response to the aforesaid, on February 26, 2007 (Doc. #274), in which he stated that Defendant "does not oppose forfeiture of any Real Property or Personal Property listed by the United States in Attachment "B" to its Memorandum because 'none of it belongs to him,"' and that he objected to the imposition of a $10 million money judgment for which he and Defendant Taylor would be jointly liable, arguing that "the testimony at trial indicated that he derived no more than $60,000 from his drug trafficking activity." On April 2, 2007, Defendant was sentenced to a total term of 180 months in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (Doc. #283), journalized in a Judgment Entry (Doc. #285). His trial counsel then filed a Notice of Appeal on Defendant's behalf (Doc. #288), following which he was allowed to withdraw as counsel of record (Doc. #293). On May 4, 2007, the Court stayed proceedings on any money judgment and/or forfeiture, pending resolution of the appeal (Doc. #295). When the Defendant's convictions were affirmed on appeal, the Court filed an Entry setting forth procedures leading to the resolution of the above matters (Doc. #353). When Defendant objected to the reappointment of his initial trial counsel, counsel was replaced by new counsel, Cheryll Bennett, Assistant Federal Public Defender for the Southern District of Ohio. The Court has been advised that "all attempts to reach a resolution with the Defendant Richard Auston on the matter of forfeiture have failed." (Doc. #372 at 1).

Accordingly, a review of the entirety of the Court's file reflects that Defendant has never wavered from the statement of his counsel, to the effect that the Defendant "does not oppose forfeiture of any of the Real Property or Personal Property listed by the United States in [Attachment] B to its Memorandum because none of it belongs to him." (Doc. #274 at 1). Accordingly, all of the items listed on Attachment "B" (attached), save and excepting the two items (paragraphs 1 and 4) that have been excluded therefrom, are ordered forfeited to the Government.

As indicated, Defendant has objected to the $10 million money judgment requested by the Government. The Government has conceded that it will, consistent with the evidence of the Defendant's actual involvement in drug trafficking activities and consistent with the Defendant's position, agree to a money judgment against Defendant in the amount of $60,000, for which he will be solely liable.

WHEREFORE, based upon the aforesaid, the Court orders the entry of judgment in favor of the Government and against Defendant in the amount of $60,000, for which he will be solely responsible, and forfeiture, against the Defendant and in favor of the Government, for all items listed on the appended Attachment "B," save and excepting the items in paragraphs number 1 and 4 therein.

____________

WALTER H. RICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to: Counsel of record


Summaries of

United States v. Auston

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Apr 12, 2013
Case No. 3:04cr130 (2) (S.D. Ohio Apr. 12, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Auston

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD AUSTON, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Apr 12, 2013

Citations

Case No. 3:04cr130 (2) (S.D. Ohio Apr. 12, 2013)