Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Court filing — United States v. Johnson (Dkt. 54)

Court filing — United States v. Johnson (Dkt. 54)

Full text

Case 2:24-cr-00383-HCN-CMR             Document 54         Filed 08/11/25     PageID.230        Page 1
                                             of 2




 FELICE JOHN VITI, Acting United States Attorney (7007)
 CAROL A. DAIN, Assistant United States Attorney (10065)
 TRAVIS K. ELDER, Assistant United States Attorney (11987)
 Attorneys for the United States of America
 111 South Main Street, Suite 1800, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
 (801) 524-5682 | Carol.Dain@usdoj.gov | Travis.Elder@usdoj.gov

                               UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                        DISTRICT OF UTAH


 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                            JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING
                                                      FORFEITURE DETERMINATION
                         Plaintiff,
                                                      Case No. 2:24-cr-00383-RJS
         vs.
                                                      Chief Judge Robert J. Shelby
 BRENT RICHARD JOHNSON,
                         Defendant.


        The United States of America and Defendant Brent Richard Johnson agree as follows:

        1.      The Indictment includes a forfeiture notice advising the defendants that the

 United States is seeking forfeiture of specific property. ECF 1.

        2.      Under Rule 32.2(b)(5) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, either plaintiff

 or defendant may request to have the jury retained to determine the forfeitability of specific

 property upon a guilty verdict. The “court must determine before the jury begins deliberating

 whether either party requests that the jury be retained to determine the forfeitability of specific

 property if it returns a guilty verdict.” Rule 32.2(b)(5)(A).

        3.      The parties agree that the Court may decide whether the United States has

 established the requisite nexus between the forfeitable property and the offenses, and the jury
Case 2:24-cr-00383-HCN-CMR             Document 54         Filed 08/11/25      PageID.231       Page 2
                                             of 2




 does not need to be retained to determine forfeitability. Since a forfeiture phase of the trial will

 not be necessary, the parties will not provide forfeiture jury instructions to the Court.

        4.      Within a reasonable time after a verdict of guilt, the United States will submit a

 motion for order of forfeiture, which can be resolved in the ordinary course of post-trial

 proceedings.


        Respectfully submitted,

                                                FELICE JOHN VITI
                                                Acting United States Attorney

                                                /s/ Travis K. Elder
                                                TRAVIS K. ELDER
                                                CAROL A. DAIN
                                                Assistant U.S. Attorneys



                                                /s/ Craig R. Johnson
                                                CRAIG R. JOHNSON
                                                Attorney for Mr. Johnson
                                                (signed with permission)




                                                   2


File and source

File
54.pdf
Size
139,649 bytes
SHA-256
e27170d3c7ce384586aafbe2831ef720a5458e97ca0423f973873df81e95901b
Our copy
54.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top