USA v. John Couch

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant John Patrick Couch. Decision: Dismissed as Moot. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions.

Case: 16-16361

Date Filed: 08/15/2017

Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-16361
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cr-00088-CG-B-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN PATRICK COUCH,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Alabama
________________________
(August 15, 2017)
Before HULL, WILSON, and JORDAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
John Patrick Couch, M.D., filed an interlocutory appeal seeking the reversal
of the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate several pretrial warrants,

Case: 16-16361

Date Filed: 08/15/2017

Page: 2 of 2

arguing that the government improperly seized certain of his assets.

After

Dr. Couch filed his appeal, his case proceeded to trial. Dr. Couch was ultimately
convicted of several conspiracy and narcotics charges related to a scheme to
distribute controlled substances under the guise of maintaining a pain management
facility. Following his convictions, Dr. Couch and the government entered into a
forfeiture agreement stipulating that Dr. Couch was voluntarily forfeiting the
related assets and that the government had established the necessary connection
between the forfeited assets and his illegal acts. The district court subsequently
entered a preliminary order of forfeiture.
Upon review of the record, the parties’ briefs, and their responses to our
latest jurisdictional question, we agree with the parties that this appeal is now
moot. As a result, we dismiss Dr. Couch’s appeal. See United States v. Serrapio,
754 F.3d 1312, 1317 (11th. Cir. 2014) (“A case becomes moot only when it is
impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing
party.”) (quoting Knox v. Serv. Employees Int’l Union, Local 1000, 567 U.S. 298,
307 (2012)).
APPEAL DISMISSED AS MOOT.

2