Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings U.S. v. Daragjati Motion for Preliminary Order of Forfeiture — United States v. Daragjati

Court filing

Motion for Preliminary Order of Forfeiture — United States v. Daragjati

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville Division)
Filed2023-08-01

U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida (Jacksonville Division) · No. 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL · Doc. 30 · 2023-08-01 · Docket on CourtListener

Summary

The United States' motion for a preliminary order of forfeiture for proceeds in United States v. Christopher Leo Daragjati, Case No. 3:23-cr-48-TJC-LLL, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, filed August 1, 2023 as Document 30. It asks the court, under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(2), to enter a forfeiture order of $200,000, the amount the motion states the defendant admitted obtaining from the offenses in Counts One, Eleven, and Thirteen. The memorandum states that the defendant pleaded guilty on July 20, 2023 and that his plea agreement (Doc. 26) provides for forfeiture of that sum and of substitute assets under 21 U.S.C. § 853(p). It also asks that the order be final upon entry. The motion is signed by an Assistant United States Attorney.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
 
 
 
v. 
  
Case No. 3:23-cr-48-TJC-LLL 
 
CHRISTOPHER LEO DARAGJATI 
 
UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 
ORDER OF FORFEITURE FOR PROCEEDS 
 
The United States moves the Court, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), 28 
U.S.C. § 2461(c), and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(2), to enter as soon as practical, a 
preliminary order of forfeiture for proceeds in the amount of $200,000, representing 
the amount of proceeds the defendant admits he obtained as a result of the offenses 
charged in Counts One, Eleven, and Thirteen of the Indictment.    
The United States further asks that the orders of forfeiture become final as to 
the defendant upon entry. In support of its motion, the United States submits the 
following memorandum of law. 
MEMORANDUM OF LAW 
l. 
Statement of Facts 
 
A.  
Allegations Against the Defendant  
1. 
The defendant was charged in an Indictment, in pertinent part, with 
wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Counts One and Thirteen), aggravated 
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 1 of 7 PageID 121

2 
 
identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A1 (Counts Four and Twelve), and 
theft of government property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Count Eleven). Doc. 1. 
2. 
The Indictment contained forfeiture allegations putting the defendant 
on notice that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the 
United States would seek an order of forfeiture in the amount of $200,000.00 
representing the proceeds he obtained as a result of the offense charged in Counts, 
One, Eleven, and Thirteen. Id.  
 
B.  
Finding of Guilt and Admission Related to Forfeiture 
3. 
On July 20, 2023, the defendant pleaded guilty to Counts One, Four, 
Eleven, Twelve and Thirteen. Docs. 24, 27. The sentencing for the defendant is set 
for October 26, 2023. Doc. 29.     
4. 
In his Plea Agreement (Doc. 26), the defendant specifically agreed to 
immediately and voluntarily forfeit the sum of $200,000 in proceeds, which he 
admits he personally obtained as a result of the commission of the offenses. Id. at 7-8.  
4. 
The defendant further agreed that as a result of his acts and omissions, 
the proceeds not recovered by the United States through the forfeiture of the directly 
traceable assets were transferred to third parties and cannot be located by the United 
States upon the exercise of due diligence. Id.  
5. 
Moreover, the defendant also agreed that since the criminal proceeds 
have been transferred to third parties and cannot be located by the United States 
 
1 There is no forfeiture provision for aggravated identity theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A). 
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 2 of 7 PageID 122

3 
 
upon the exercise of due diligence, the preliminary and final orders of forfeiture 
should authorize the United States Attorney’s Office to conduct discovery (including 
depositions, interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and the issuance 
of subpoenas), pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(3) of  the Federal Rules of Criminal 
Procedure, to help identify, locate, and forfeit substitute assets. Id. at 8. Accordingly, 
the defendant also agreed the United States is entitled to forfeit any of the 
defendant’s property as substitute assets to satisfy the Preliminary Order of Forfeiture 
for Proceeds, and that the order of forfeiture would be final upon entry. Id. at 8- 9. 
C.  
Admissions of Fact 
6. 
In the Factual Basis of his Plea Agreement, (Doc. 26 at 23-28) the 
defendant admitted to a factual basis which describes the conduct underlying the 
charges in the Indictment and provides support for the forfeiture. Specifically, the 
defendant admitted that in committing the offenses involving the use of various 
stolen identities of genuine individuals to commit fraud, the defendant personally 
obtained $200,000. Id. at 28. 
II. 
Applicable Law 
 
 
A. 
Forfeiture Authority  
 
Criminal forfeiture in this case is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), which 
provides for the civil forfeiture of any property, real or personal, that constitutes or is 
derived from proceeds traceable to a violation of any offense constituting “specified 
unlawful activity” (as defined in section 1956(c)(7) of this title), or a conspiracy to 
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 3 of 7 PageID 123

4 
 
commit such offense. A violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 1343 are a “specified 
unlawful activity” under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7). See 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 18 
U.S.C. § 1956(c)(7)(D). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), the United States is 
authorized to forfeit criminally any property that may be forfeited civilly, and the 
procedures for the forfeiture and disposition of such property are governed by 21 
U.S.C. § 853. 
 
 
B. 
Court’s Determination of Forfeiture  
 
Rule 32.2(b)(1)(A), Fed. R. Crim. P., requires that as soon as practical after a 
verdict or finding of guilty, or after a plea of guilty is accepted, the Court must 
determine what property is subject to forfeiture under the applicable statute. Fed. R. 
Crim. P. 32.2(b)(1)(A). When the government seeks to forfeit specific property, the 
Court must determine whether the government has established the requisite nexus 
between the property and the defendant’s crimes. Id.  
For cases in which a defendant no longer has the actual dollars or property 
traceable to proceeds in his possession, or the government cannot locate those assets, 
the obligation to forfeit simply takes the form of an order of forfeiture in favor of the 
United States. See United States v. Padron, 527 F.3d 1156, 1161-62 (11th Cir. 2008). 
Rule 32.2(b)(1) provides that the court must determine the amount of money that the 
defendant will be ordered to pay. The Court’s determination may be based on 
evidence submitted by the parties and accepted by the Court as relevant and reliable. 
Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(1)(B). As the defendant has admitted in his plea agreement, 
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 4 of 7 PageID 124

5 
 
he obtained $200,000 in proceeds as a result of the commission of the offenses. Doc. 
26 at 7-8.  
The defendant further admitted that the criminal proceeds have been transferred 
to third parties and cannot be located by the United States. Id. at 8. Because the United 
States could not locate the specific property constituting or derived from the proceeds 
the defendant obtained from his participation in wire fraud and theft of government 
property, the United States seeks an order of forfeiture against the defendant in the 
amount of $200,000, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), and 
Rule 32.2(b)(2).  
If the Court finds that at least $200,000 was obtained by the defendant, and 
that he has dissipated those proceeds, then it is appropriate for the Court to enter 
preliminary order of forfeiture for proceeds against the defendant in that amount 
pursuant to Rule 32.2(b)(2).  
III. 
Conclusion 
For the reasons stated above, the United States requests that, pursuant to 18 
U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b), the Court 
enter a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture for Proceeds against the defendant in the 
amount of $200,000.  
The United States further requests that, because the $200,000 in proceeds were 
dissipated by the defendant, the United States may seek, as a substitute asset, 
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 5 of 7 PageID 125

6 
 
pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(p), as incorporated by 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c), forfeiture of 
any of the defendant’s property up to the value of $200,000.  
The United States further requests that, in accordance with his Plea 
Agreement (Doc. 26 at 9), the Preliminary Order of Forfeiture for Proceeds and 
Specific Assets become final as to the defendant at the time it is entered.  
 
 As required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(4)(B), the United States requests that 
the Court include the forfeiture when orally pronouncing the sentence and include the 
forfeiture order in the judgment. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(4)(B) and United States v. 
Kennedy, 201 F.3d 1324, 1326 (11th Cir. 2000). 
The United States further requests that the Court retain jurisdiction to address 
any third-party claim that may be asserted in these proceedings, to enter any further 
order necessary for the forfeiture and disposition of such property, and to order any 
substitute assets forfeited to the United States up to the amount of the order of 
forfeiture. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
By: 
Respectfully Submitted, 
 
ROGER B. HANDBERG 
United States Attorney 
 
s/Mai Tran                                     I 
MAI TRAN  
 
 
 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Florida Bar No. 100982 
300 N. Hogan Street, Suite 700 
Jacksonville, Florida 32202  
Telephone: (904) 301-6300 
Facsimile: (904) 301-6310 
E-Mail: mai.tran2@usdoj.gov  
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 6 of 7 PageID 126

7 
 
 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
 
 
I hereby certify that on August 1, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing with 
the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of 
electronic filing to counsel of record  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s/Mai Tran                                     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MAI TRAN  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Assistant United States Attorney 
 
 
Case 3:23-cr-00048-TJC-LLL     Document 30     Filed 08/01/23     Page 7 of 7 PageID 127

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.flmd.412227.30.0.pdf
Size
97,193 bytes
SHA-256
23cd9a987ca0c2c0af2331d86f1ed938b19daa929696f26f72ca9ecf4947e195
Our copy
gov.uscourts.flmd.412227.30.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top