Legal Opinion
United States v. William Haskell Farmer
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided December 12, 2001No. 00-4580PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Chief Judge WILKINSON wrote the opinion, in which Judge GREGORY and Judge HOWARD joined.
OPINION
WILKINSON, Chief Judge:
Defendant William Farmer seeks a hearing to determine whether he is entitled to fund his criminal defense using some or all of the assets seized pursuant to civil forfeiture statutes prior to his indictment. The district court denied Farmer’s request for a hearing. Because Farmer made a substantial showing that some of the seized assets may be both legitimate and necessary to hire an attorney, we vacate the judgment and remand with…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Kaley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- United States v. KaleyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2009
- United States v. J. Richard JamiesonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Jeffrey CohenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2018
- United States v. SteinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.