Opinion ID: 6498741
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Past Procedural History

Text: This case stems from a 66-count, multi-defendant criminal indictment charging offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 287, 371, 1001, 1343, 1519, 1957, and 42 U.S.C. § 7413. The indictment notified the criminal defendants that the government would seek criminal forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(1), (a)(2)(A), (b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c) as part of any sentence imposed and (in addition to or in the alternative) would seek civil forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A), (a)(1)(C), (a)(1)(D), and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c). As can be inferred from the indictment, the criminal proceedings were complex. Relevant to this appeal now before us, Joseph Furando and two of his companies, Caravan Trading, LLC and Cima Green, LLC, pleaded guilty to multiple counts in the indictment. Joseph Furando’s plea included agreed-upon forfeiture of personal property, assets, and vehicles. He agreed to abandon his rights, title, and interest in personal property, vehicles, motorcycles, funds, and other identified assets. He also agreed to abandon No. 20-1526 3 his right, title, and interest to real property at 23 Burning Hollow Road located in Saddle River, New Jersey and to proceeds from sale of commercial real estate at 37 South Kinderkamack Road located in Montvale, New Jersey. Joseph Furando acknowledged in his plea agreement “that all of the property and funds to be forfeited constituted proceeds of the offense to which he [pleaded] guilty and was used or intended to be used in the criminal offense.” Details of his post-indictment conduct aside, Joseph Furando appealed his conviction, arguing that he was entitled to a two-level reduction in his offense level for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to the Sentencing Guidelines. The Seventh Circuit characterized the appeal as “frivolous” and entered an opinion affirming his sentence. See United States v. Furando, 655 Fed. App’x 507 (7th Cir. 2016). On May 30, 2017, the district court entered preliminary orders of forfeiture against these three criminal defendants. The preliminary forfeiture orders directed the government to give notice to potential third-party interest holders pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n), which the government did.