USA v. Alebbini

United States District Court Southern District of Ohio
Case #: 3:17-cr-00071
Circuit: 6th
Cause:

Read more on govinfo.gov

Plaintiffs:

USA,

Defendants:

Alebbini, Laith

2022-01-25: DECISION AND ORDER - Defendants Motions for Discovery (ECF No. 138) and to Expand the Record (ECF No. 139) are DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 1/24/2022. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

2021-02-18: FINAL ORDER OF FORFEITURE as to Laith Waleed Alebbini (1) - THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. All right, title, and interest in the subject property is condemned and forfeited to the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(G)(i)-(iii) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) and no right, title, or interest shall remain in any other person or entity. 2. The United States shall dispose of the subject property in accordance with the law. 3. The United States District Court shall retain jurisdiction in the case for the purpose of enforcing this Final Order of Forfeiture. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 2/18/2021. (srb)

2019-05-17: DECISION AND ENTRY OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S SECOND PRO SE MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL (DOC. #86)denying 86 Motion for New Trial as to Laith Waleed Alebbini (1). Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 5/16/19. (pb)

2019-04-25: DECISION AND ENTRY OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S PRO SE MOTIONS (DOC. ## 40, 44 AND 72). Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 4/24/2019. (srb)

2019-03-12: PRELIMINARY ORDER FO FORFEITURE - THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. All right, title, and interest is the subject property is condemned and forfeited to the United States pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(l)(G)(i)-(iii) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c). 2. The United States is authorized to seize the subject property, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(g) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(3), whether held by the Defendant or a third party; conduct any discovery for identifying, locating, or disposing of the property; and to commence proceedings that comply with any statutes governing third party rights. 3. In accordance with the direction provided by the Attorney General and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(6), the United States shall publish notice of this Order and send notice to any person who reasonably appears to be a potential claimant with standing to contest the forfeiture in the ancillary proceeding. Publication must take place as described in Supplemental Rule G(4)(a)(iii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and may be by any means described in Supplemental Rule G(4)(a)(iv). Publication is unnecessary if any exception in Supplemental Rule G(4)(a)(i) applies. 4. The notice must describe the forfeited property, state the times under the applicable statute when a petition contesting the forfeiture must be filed, and state the name and contact information for the Assistant United States Attorney to be served with the petition. The notice maybe sent in accordance with Supplemental Rules G(4)(b) (iii)-(v). 5. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(2}, any person, other than the Defendant, asserting a legal interest in the subject property, who wishes to contest the forfeiture of the subject property must, within thirty (30) days of the final publication of notice or of receipt of actual notice, whichever is earlier, file a petition in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio for a hearing to adjudicate the validity of the alleged legal interest in the subject property. 6. Any petition filed by a third party shall be signed by the petitioner under penalty of perjury and shall set forth the nature and extent of the petitioner's right, title, or interest in the property; the time and circumstances of the petitioner's acquisition of the right, title, or interest in the property; any additional facts supporting the petitioner's claim; and the relief sought. 7. The United States shall have clear title to the subject property following the Court's disposition of all third party interests, or if no third party petitions are timely filed, following the expiration of the period provided by statute for the filing of third party petitions. 8. This Preliminary Order of Forfeiture shall be made part of the sentence and included in the Judgment. This Order remains preliminary as to third parties until the ancillary proceeding is concluded. 9. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this order and to amend it as necessary, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(e). SO ORDERED:. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 3/12/2019. (srb)

2018-03-16: ORDER - The Court also finds the multi-level review process described in the government's motion was an acceptable and adequate procedure to review classified information in this case. The Court hereby AUTHORIZES the government to produce the government-proposed substitutions in lieu of the underlying classified information because the substitutions place the defense in substantially the same position as if the defense had access to the underlying classified information at issue. The Court ORDERS the government's submission (including the motion, all attachments, and any transcripts relating to the government's filing) to be sealed and preserved in the records of the trial court so the records can be made available to the appellate court in the event of an appeal. The government's submission will not be disclosed to the defense, and the defense's submission will not be disclosed to the government. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 3/15/2018. (srb)

2018-01-05: DECISION AND ENTRY OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO REVOKE DETENTION ORDER, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO RENEWAL UPON AN EVENT CERTAIN; REASONING SET FORTH; CONCERN OF THE COURT. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 1/5/2018. (srb)

2017-10-19: ORDER - The United States of America, having applied for the appointment of a Classified Information Security Officer and alternates pursuant to Section 9 of the Classified Information Procedures Act, 18 U.S.C. App. III ("CIPA"), and Section 2 of the Security Procedures established pursuant to Pub. L. 96-456, 94 Stat. 2025, by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED that the application is GRANTED. Jt is further ORDERED, in accordance with Section 9 of CI PA and the Security Procedures established pursuant to Pub. L. 96-456, 94 Stat. 2025, that the Court designates Harry J. Rucker as the Classified Information Security Officer in this case. It is further ORDERED that the Court designates the following persons as Alternate Classified Information Security Officers, to serve in the event Mr. Rucker is not available: Debra M. Guerrero-Randall, Daniel 0. Hartenstine, Joan B. Kennedy, Shawn P. Mahoney, Maura L. Peterson, Carli V. Rodriguez-Fee, and W. Scooter Slade. It is further ORDERED that the designated Classified Information Security Officer and alternates shall perform the functions and carry out the duties and responsibilities prescribed in the Security Procedures promulgated under Section 9 of CIPA.. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 10/19/2017. (srb)

2017-05-23: PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 5/23/2017. (pb)