United States v. Joseph Fabian

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding a “conclusory legal interest” falls short of meeting the requirements of § 853(n)(3)
• “By its plain terms, therefore, § 853(n) does not permit ‘relitigation’ of the district court’s antecedent determination that an item of prop- erty is subject to forfeiture.”
• “§ 853(n) does not permit ‘relitigation’ of the district court’s antecedent determination that an item of property is subject to forfeiture.” (citing Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2 advisory committee’s note)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).