U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit Forfeiture / Penalty Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 26
US v. Augustine Perez
as 23-7280
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant:
AUGUSTINE PEREZ and DEANNA COLEMAN
Defendant:
$25,325.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY
US v. Gerald Whaley
as 23-6172
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
GERALD DECOSTA WHALEY, a/k/a Costa
US v. Argenis Rivera-Alicea
as 23-6165
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant:
ARGENIS SAMUEL RIVERA-ALICEA
Defendant:
2016 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS CONVERTIBLE, VIN 1G1FH3D79G0183851
US v. Jermaine Sanders
as 22-2290
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant:
JERMAINE LYDELL SANDERS
Defendant:
$16,761 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY, seized from Jermaine Lydell Sanders on in Mooresville, NC
US v. Damian Phillip
as 16-2358
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant - Appellant:
DAMIAN PHILLIPS
Defendant:
CURRENCY, $200,000.00 IN U.S
US v. Michael Howze
as 16-1929
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant - Appellant:
MICHAEL HOWZE
Defendant:
CURRENCY, $15,795.00 IN U.S.
US v. Lucy Dial
as 14-2365
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant - Appellant:
LUCY BELL DIAL
Defendant:
$2,990.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY and $47,000.00 IN U.S. CURRENCY
US v. $100,000 U.S. Currency
as 14-1959
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
$100,000 U.S. CURRENCY
US v. $2,280.00 in US Currency
as 13-2434
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant - Appellant:
JOHN HARVEY GODDARD, SR.
Defendant:
$2,280.00 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY
US v. Sims' Personal Property
as 13-2163
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Claimant - Appellant:
THOMAS EDWARD SIMS, II
Defendant:
SIMS' PERSONAL PROPERTY, Specifically Described as a 2012 Volkswagen Passat SEL, VIN: 1VWCH7A34CC057759 and any and all proceeds from the sale of said property
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.
