Court filing
Judgment — United States v. Andrew Marnell (Dkt. 103, C.D. Cal. No. 2:20-cr-00319)
Filed February 6, 2024 in United States v. Andrew Marnell; one of 60 filings from this case.
Record facts
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California |
|---|---|
| Filed | 2024-02-06 |
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California · No. 2:20-cr-00319-RGK · Doc. 103 · 2024-02-06 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
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
E. MARTIN ESTRADA
United States Attorney
MACK E. JENKINS
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
JONATHAN GALATZAN (Cal. Bar No. 190414)
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Asset Forfeiture and Recovery Section
U.S. Courthouse, Suite 1400
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, California 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-2727
Facsimile: (213) 894-7819
E-mail: Jonathan.Galatzan@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
ANDREW MARNELL,
Defendant.
No 2:20-CR-00319-RGK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S
APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER
DIRECTING THE IRS TO TURN
OVER FUNDS SEIZED BY FEDERAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS
FROM DEFENDANT ANDREW
MARNELL TO THE CLERK OF THE
COURT FOR APPLICATION TO
DEFENDANT’S CRIMINAL
MONETARY OBLIGATIONS
[Proposed] ORDER.
Hearing Date: None
Case 2:20-cr-00319-RGK Document 103 Filed 02/06/24 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:522
1
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
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff United States of America respectfully applies to the Court, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 3664(m)(1)(A)(ii), for an order directing the IRS to turn over funds it
holds to the Clerk of the Court to be applied to the criminal restitution judgment of
defendant Andrew Marnell (“Defendant”).
II.
BACKGROUND
On November 3, 2023, the Court ordered Defendant to pay $5,627,076.33 in
restitution. (Dkt. 99). The United States seeks an order requiring the IRS to turn over to
the Clerk of the Court all funds in its possession which were lawfully seized from
Defendant and to apply these funds to Defendant’s restitution obligation.
IRS seized from Defendant, and has in its possession, the following funds:
Account, Interactive Brokers, LLC:
$526.32
Account, Interactive Brokers LLC:
$165,894.19
Account, Interactive Brokers, LLC:
$3,321.90
Account, Charles Schwab Corporation:
$25,185.37
Account, Charles Schwab Corporation:
$1,341,709.67
Account, Aspiration Financial:
$5,217.77
Account, Aspiration Financial, LLC:
$324.84
The United States requests that the Court issue an order directing the IRS to turn
over to the Clerk of the Court the seized funds and to apply these funds to the
Defendant’s outstanding restitution balance.
III. THE COURT SHOULD GRANT THE GOVERNMENT’S APPLICATION
The United States Attorney’s Office is responsible for collecting unpaid fines and
restitution. See 18 U.S.C. § 3612(c). The United States may enforce a judgment
imposing criminal monetary penalties, including restitution, using the practices and
procedures for enforcement of civil judgments under federal or state law. Such a
judgment “may be enforced against all property or rights to property” of the defendant,
Case 2:20-cr-00319-RGK Document 103 Filed 02/06/24 Page 2 of 4 Page ID #:523
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
with few exemptions. Id., § 3613(a) & (f). Once a court enters judgment in a criminal
case, a lien arises in favor of the United States on “all property and rights to property” of
the defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3613(c). Accordingly, upon the entry of the Judgment
against Defendant, a lien arose against her “property and rights to property” in the
amount ordered in the Judgment.1
As set forth above, the IRS lawfully seized funds from Defendant. Any property
lawfully seized by the government is subject to any legitimate continuing interest it has
in the property. United States v. Mills, 991 F.2d 609, 612 (9th Cir. 1993) (finding
restitution order created legitimate government interest to defeat defendant’s request for
return of lawfully seized cash). Further, the government’s legitimate interest in the
property takes precedence over the subject’s ownership interest in the property seized.
Id. The government may establish a legitimate interest by demonstrating “a cognizable
claim of ownership or right to possession adverse to that of the defendant.” Id.
In Mills, the Ninth Circuit recognized that a valid restitution order “gives the
government a sufficient cognizable claim of ownership to defeat a defendant’s Rule
41(e) motion for return of property if that property is needed to satisfy the terms of the
restitution order.” Id.; see also United States v. Kaczynski, 416 F.3d 971, 974 (9th Cir.
2005) (noting that “because a restitution order is enforceable as a lien on all of a
defendant’s property, a court may order that a defendant’s property already in the
government’s possession be applied to his restitution debt.”). Here, the government
has the equivalent interest it had in Mills: Collecting the restitution obligation imposed
against Defendant. See Mills, 991 F.2d at 612. Accordingly, the government has a
legitimate interest in the lawfully seized funds held by the IRS.
Because the United States has an obligation to collect criminal judgments on
behalf of victims and has a valid lien against all of Defendant’s real and personal
1 The 18 U.S.C. § 3613(c) lien applies to both a defendant’s real and personal
property. United States v. Murphy, 2015 WL 2445050, at *1 (N.D. Ill. May 20, 2015)
(stating that “[u]nlike an ordinary judgment lien which when recorded simply binds real
property, a § 3613 judgment lien extends to both real and personal property.”)
Case 2:20-cr-00319-RGK Document 103 Filed 02/06/24 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:524
3
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
property, any assets being held by a government agency in which a defendant has a
substantial interest are subject to the government’s continuing interest in the satisfaction
of that judgment. Kaczynski, 416 F.3d at 974; 18 U.S.C. §§ 3613(a), (f) and
3664(m)(1)(A)(ii).
Based on the above, the Court should order the IRS to turn over the seized funds
to the Clerk of the Court for purposes of applying the funds to Defendant’s criminal
monetary obligations.
IV. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court should issue the order submitted with this
application.
DATED: February 6, 2024
Respectfully submitted,
E. MARTIN ESTRADA
United States Attorney
MACK E. JENKINS
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Criminal Division
/s/ Jonathan Galatzan
JONATHAN GALATZAN
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Case 2:20-cr-00319-RGK Document 103 Filed 02/06/24 Page 4 of 4 Page ID #:525File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.cacd.790198.103.0.pdf
- Size
- 343,790 bytes
- SHA-256
- 72f4e74c5ae0723fd8a5aa8c745ea847574b4cabf3ba0ddb8b33130bb3359a3e
- Original
- PACER (login required)