Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Anthony Leon WAITS, Defendant - Appellant.
[Unpublished]
Anthony Waits appeals after the district court 1 entered an amended order of forfeiture, following this court's affirmance of his wire fraud conviction and remand of the forfeiture issue for further proceedings.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not err by ordering forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c). Although the indictment cited only 18 U.S.C. § 982, Waits had adequate notice that the government intended to seek forfeiture. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(a); United States v. Silvious, 512 F.3d 364, 370 (7th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we affirm, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and deny Waits's pending motion as moot.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Honorable James M. Moody Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
PER CURIAM.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 19-3382
Decided: December 08, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)