United States v. Carman, No. 17-5074 (6th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCarman was indicted for her involvement in a massive conspiracy to sell untaxed cigarettes. A jury convicted Carman and others of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. The district court held a forfeiture hearing the next day. The government stated that the only items of property it sought from Carman were two Cadillacs and later requested a money judgment against Carman of about $35 million. The district court sentenced Carman to 60 months’ imprisonment without addressing any money judgment or otherwise mentioning forfeiture. More than four months after Carman appealed her conviction and sentence, that court entered a forfeiture order for $17.5 million. Carman appealed that order. The Sixth Circuit vacated, finding that the district court lacked authority to enter that order. When a district court finds that property is subject to forfeiture, it must, whenever possible, enter a preliminary order of forfeiture “sufficiently in advance of sentencing to allow the parties to suggest revisions” before the sentencing hearing, Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(b)(2)(A), (B), and “must include the forfeiture when orally announcing the sentence or must otherwise ensure that the defendant knows of the forfeiture at sentencing.” Upon the filing of Carmen’s notice of appeal, adjudicatory authority over her conviction and sentence passed to the Sixth Circuit. A forfeiture order is part of the defendant’s sentence, so the district court lacked authority to enter its forfeiture order after Carman had filed her notice of appeal.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.