64 F.3d 660 (4th Cir. 1995), 94-1938, U.S. v. Cook
|Citation:||64 F.3d 660|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Grace Hawkins COOK, Claimant-Appellant,and 8619 Mulberry Street, Laurel, Maryland, with all buildings, appurtenances and improvements thereon, Defendant.|
|Case Date:||August 29, 1995|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit|
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA4 Rule 36 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Submitted July 31, 1995.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA-93-3970-PJM)
AFFIRMED IN PART AND VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.
Grace Hawkins Cook, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Charles Kay, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, MD, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Grace Hawkins Cook appeals the district court's final order granting summary judgment in favor of the United States, condemning the Defendant property, and forfeiting to the United States the interest of Cook and any and all other persons and entities in the Defendant property. Cook challenges the validity of the Government's acquisition of her residence located at 8619 Mulberry Street, Laurel, Maryland.
In its verified complaint for forfeiture, the Government alleged that probable cause existed to believe that the Defendant property was used and was intended to be used to facilitate the trafficking of cocaine, and that the Defendant property was purchased in part with proceeds traceable to sales of controlled substances. 1 Cook, by counsel, answered the verified complaint, denying the allegations set forth in the complaint. Cook specifically averred that she is the widowed mother of three sons, and that she knew nothing of drug money.
The Government filed a motion for summary judgment, to which Cook responded. The summary judgment materials reveal that eight ounces of cocaine were seized at the Defendant property pursuant to a warrant, and that the Defendant property was used repeatedly by Cook's sons to sell and use cocaine. Cook pled guilty in 1989 to maintaining a common nuisance, to wit, the Defendant property. Cook stated in sworn answers to the Government's interrogatories that: "To my...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP