(1)Where a defendant who was convicted of various charges including wire fraud, mail fraud and money laundering challenged the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, the government satisfied the particularity requirement, and the search warrant was not required to include Section 853(f) findings, so the district court properly found that the warrant was valid, and the convictions are affirmed over the defendant’s challenges to jurisdiction, alleged investigative misconduct and trial error.
(2)Where a defendant in a fraud case argued that a district court erred in failing to submit to the jury the total amount that the defendant was to forfeit, recent case law on the issue does not apply to criminal forfeitures, so the right to a jury verdict on forfeitability does not fall within the Sixth Amendment’s constitutional protection.
Judgment is affirmed.
U.S. v. Sigillito (MLW No. 66677/Case No. 13-1027 – 12 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Smith, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Reade, J. (Douglas P. Roller for appellant) (Richard E. Finneran and Jess E. Michaelsen for appellee).