Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Baldwin

United States District Court, D. Utah

September 28, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
NANCI BALDWIN, AKA NANCI BALDWIN BARNETT, Defendant.

          David Nuffer, Magistrate Judge.

          POST-INDICTMENT RESTRAINING ORDER UNDER 21 U.S.C. § 853(E)(1)(A)

          Paul Kohler United States District Judge

         The United States has made an application to this Court, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(e)(1)(A), for a restraining order to preserve the availability of certain property that the United States seeks to forfeit in this case (“Application”).[1] Upon consideration of the Application, [2] it appears to the Court that there is reasonable cause to enter a restraining order to preserve for forfeiture:

Any assets or assets traceable to such assets that Jay Bezanson, Stephen Robichaud, and/or Jag Equities Corp (“Subject Third Parties”) have received from Nanci Baldwin into Jag Equities' JP Morgan Chase Bank account ending in 8635 (hereinafter “Subject Property”),

based upon the following:

         1. That a federal grand jury for this district returned an Indictment charging the above defendant with federal crimes including wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Furthermore, the Indictment contains a notice of the United States' intent to seek forfeiture of proceeds obtained from the wire fraud scheme. Indictment at 7, ECF No. 1.

         2. That the Declaration of Special Agent Chris Andersen[3] sets forth sufficient facts establishing probable cause connecting the Subject Property to the wire fraud scheme alleged in the indictment.

         3. That the Subject Property for which the order is sought would, in the event of Nanci Baldwin's conviction, be subject to forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A).[4]

         4. That any third-party claims to the Subject Property may be properly brought and resolved in ancillary proceedings conducted by this Court following the execution of a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture in accordance with the provisions of federal forfeiture law.

         5. That the Court has jurisdiction to enter this order pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(e)(1), as made applicable to this case by 18 U.S.C. § 982(b)(1).

         THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED:

         That, effective immediately:

Jay Bezanson,
Stephen Robichaud,

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.