USA v. 12508 Dollars in US Currency
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 11 Motion to Appoint Counsel: Vanessa M. Ramos, FPD, shall be appointed for the limited purpose of filing a motion addressing whether Mr. Al-Rekabi meets the requirements for appointment of counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul M. Warner on 11/29/18 (alt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CENTRAL DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
MEMORANDUM DECISION
AND ORDER
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:18-cv-00439-TC-PMW
v.
$11,708.00 in U.S. Currency and $800.00 in
U.S. Currency,
District Judge Tena Campbell
Chief Magistrate Judge Paul M. Warner
Defendants in Rem.
District Judge Tena Campbell referred this case to Chief Magistrate Judge Paul M.
Warner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). 1 Before the court is claimant Ahmed Al-Rekabi’s
(“Mr. Al-Rekabi”) Petition for Appointment of Attorney (the “Motion”). 2 The court has carefully
reviewed the written memoranda submitted by the parties. Pursuant to Civil Rule 7-1(f) of the
Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Utah (the “Local Rules”),
the court has concluded that oral argument is not necessary and will decide the Motion on the
basis of the written memoranda. See DUCivR 7-1(f).
Mr. Al-Rekabi filed the Motion seeking an order appointing counsel in this action
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. 3 However, as the United States correctly points out in its
1
See docket no. 12.
2
See docket no. 11.
3
See id. at 1.
opposition to the Motion, appointment of counsel in a civil forfeiture is governed by 18 U.S.C. §
983(b). Section 983(b) provides for appointment of counsel if a claimant with standing is
“financially unable to obtain” counsel and the person is represented by counsel pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 3006A in a related criminal case. 18 U.S.C. § 983(b)(1)(A). “In determining whether to
authorize counsel to represent a person under” such circumstances, “the court shall take into
consideration such factors as . . . the person’s standing to contest the forfeiture; and . . . whether
the claim appears to be made in good faith.” 18 U.S.C. § 983(b)(1)(B).
Because the Motion does not address the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 983, the court
will appoint counsel for the limited purpose of filing a new motion pursuant to the governing
statute.
Accordingly, the Motion is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The
court further ORDERS that Mr. Al-Rekabi’s appointed counsel in the related criminal case, 4
Vanessa M. Ramos, shall be appointed for the limited purpose of filing a motion addressing
whether Mr. Al-Rekabi meets the requirements for appointment of counsel in this forfeiture
action under 18 U.S.C. § 983.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 29th day of November, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
PAUL M. WARNER
Chief United States Magistrate Judge
4
See USA v. Al-Rekabi et al, case no. 2:16-cr-00373-RJS-DBP.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?