United States v. Donald P. McManigal

723 F.2d 580, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 14314
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided December 20, 1983·No. 82-1754·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

ORDER

On consideration of the parties’ Circuit Rule 19 statements, filed this month in the light of Russello v. United States, _ U.S. _, 104 S.Ct. 296, 78 L.Ed.2d 17 (1983), our judgment of May 19, 1983 (see 708 F.2d 276) is vacated insofar as it holds that “any interest” in forfeiture section of racketeering statute (18 U.S.C. § 1963(a)(1) does not include proceeds derived from a pattern of racketeering activity (708 F.2d at 283-287) but is reaffirmed insofar as it holds that the United States can only recover whatever accounts receivable were still in existence at time of defendant’s conviction (708 F.2d at 287-290). 2 Therefore the district court’s order forfeiting $99,700 to the United States remains reversed.

2

. This question was left open in Russello. _ U.S. at _ n. 3, 104 S.Ct. at 304 n. 3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Donald P. McManigal, 723 F.2d 580, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 14314 (7th Cir. 1983).

723 F.2d 580 (United States v. Donald P. McManigal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Vogt
713 F. Supp. 847 (M.D. North Carolina, 1987)
United States v. Ianniello
621 F. Supp. 1455 (S.D. New York, 1985)
United States v. Richard A. Ginsburg
773 F.2d 798 (Seventh Circuit, 1985)
United States v. Richter
610 F. Supp. 480 (N.D. Illinois, 1985)
United States v. Conner
752 F.2d 566 (Eleventh Circuit, 1985)
United States v. Peter C. Alexander
741 F.2d 962 (Seventh Circuit, 1984)
United States v. Stephen T. Gorny
732 F.2d 597 (Seventh Circuit, 1984)