Order Denying Motion for Release of Frozen Funds for Payment of Attorney — No. 1:25-cr-00131 (Dkt. 37, D.N.D.)

Summary

Order Denying Motion for Release of Frozen Funds for Payment of Attorney, Document 37 filed April 8, 2026 in United States v. Isaac Osei Afoakwa, Case No. 1:25-cr-00131 in the District of North Dakota. Afoakwa moved on January 22, 2026 (Doc. No. 25) to release $46,400.00 from a Dakota Community Bank and Trust account, citing Luis v. United States, 578 U.S. 5; the United States responded February 5, 2026, and he then asked for a hearing. The indictment charges six counts of wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, aiding and abetting false tax returns and false statements relating to a health care benefit program. Under Kaley v. United States, 571 U.S. 320, Daniel M. Traynor, District Judge, finds probable cause that the funds are traceable to the charged crimes, sees no Sixth Amendment violation, and denies both motions.

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

Cite this document

“Order Denying Motion for Release of Frozen Funds for Payment of Attorney — No. 1:25-cr-00131 (Dkt. 37, D.N.D.).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/order-denying-motion-for-release-of-frozen-funds-for-payment-of-attorn-24081f50e2/, SHA-256 33ade729d6fd453c1e9b90c215f8db781178c31a8bef3f304574e0c66a0a7281.

Full text

Case 1:25-cr-00131-DMT Document 37 Filed 04/08/26 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 1:25-cr-00131

Isaac Osei Afoakwa,

Defendant.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELEASE OF
FROZEN FUNDS FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY

[¶ 1] THIS MATTER comes before the Court on a Motion for Release of Frozen Funds for

Payment of Attorney filed by the Defendant on January 22, 2026. Doc. No. 25. The United States

filed a Response on February 5, 2026. Doc. No. 26. Defendant did not reply but, instead, filed a

Motion for Hearing on March 6, 2026, approximately 22 days after the Reply deadline.1 Doc. No.

31. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motions are DENIED.

[¶ 2] Defendant requests the Court to release $46,400.00 from a Dakota Community Bank and

Trust account ending in 5969 to pay for attorney fees. He argues that not releasing the funds will

violate his right to counsel under Luis v. United States, 578 U.S. 5 (2016). Luis, however,

concluded defendants have “a Sixth Amendment right to use [their] own ‘innocent’ property to

pay a reasonable fee for the assistance of counsel.” Id. at 23. Defendant claims the assets at issue

are untainted because he objects to their forfeiture.

[¶ 3] The Supreme Court in Kaley v. United States held whether disputed assets should be

released depends upon whether there is probable cause “to believe that the assets in dispute are

1
See D.N.D. Crim. L. R. 47.1(A)(1) (setting a seven day Reply deadline in criminal cases).
-1-
Case 1:25-cr-00131-DMT Document 37 Filed 04/08/26 Page 2 of 3

traceable or otherwise sufficiently related to the crime charged in the indictment.” 571 U.S. 320,

324 (2014). This entails a two-part inquiry. The first part asks whether “the defendant has

committed an offense permitting forfeiture.” Id. 323. The second part asks whether “the property

at issue has the requisite connection to that crime.” Id. at 324.

[¶ 4] Both inquiries under Kaley are easily answered in the affirmative here. The grand jury has

indicted the Defendant with six counts of Wire Fraud, one count of Aggravated Identity Theft, two

counts of Aiding and Abetting in the Preparation and Presentation of a False and Fraudulent Tax

Return, and three counts of False Statements Relating to a Health Care Benefit Program. Doc. No.

1. The grand jury has a “singular role in finding the probable cause necessary to initiate a

prosecution for a serious crime” and this Court will not second-guess that determination here.

Kaley, 571 U.S. at 328. The crimes as charged show probable cause his assets are subject to

forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(7), 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c)

(incorporating 21 U.S.C. § 853(p)) as noted in the Forfeiture Notice in the Indictment. See Doc.

No. 1, p. 18. The first inquiry is, therefore, satisfied.

[¶ 5] The second inquiry, whether the specific property at issue is connected to the crime, is also

easily satisfied. As outlined by the United States, there is probable cause to believe the assets were

obtained through fraudulent representations that are connected to the crimes charged. The

Defendant’s only counter to this argument is he is challenging the forfeiture. He provides no

evidence to suggest the assets are not connected to the crimes as charged. Indeed, “there is no

exemption from § 853’s forfeiture or pretrial restraining order provisions for assets which a

defendant wishes to use to retain an attorney.” United States v. Monsanto, 491 U.S. 600, 614

(1989). The second inquiry is, therefore, satisfied.

[¶ 6] In short, the Court finds there is no violation of the Defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to

counsel by not releasing the clearly tainted funds at issue. If the Defendant is unable to pay his

-2-
Case 1:25-cr-00131-DMT Document 37 Filed 04/08/26 Page 3 of 3

retained counsel, Counsel may apply for appointment under the Criminal Justice Act (18 U.S.C. §

3006A) to secure payment for their services in this case.

[¶ 7] For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant’s Motion for Release of Frozen Funds for

Payment of Attorney is DENIED. Because the Court is fully apprised of the law and facts at issue

in this matter, Defendant’s request for a hearing is DENIED.

[¶ 8] IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED April 8, 2026.

Daniel M. Traynor, District Judge
United States District Court

-3-

File and source

File: 37.pdf
Size: 204,228 bytes
SHA-256: 33ade729d6fd453c1e9b90c215f8db781178c31a8bef3f304574e0c66a0a7281
Our copy: 37.pdf
Original: No public link identified.