United States v. Said
| Decision Date | 23 May 2012 |
| Docket Number | No. 10–4970.,10–4970. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Mohamed Ali SAID, a/k/a Mohammed Said, a/k/a Maxamad Cali Saciid; Mohamed Abdi Jama, a/k/a Mohammed Abdi Jamah; Abdicasiis Cabaase; Abdi Razaq Abshir Osman, a/k/a Abdirasaq Abshir; Mohamed Farah, a/k/a Mahamed Farraah Hassan, Defendants–Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREARGUED:Benjamin L. Hatch, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Geremy C. Kamens, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, Joseph E. DePadilla, Raymond E. Patricco, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia; Virginia Vander Jagt, Jerome Teresinski, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Michael S. Nachmanoff, Federal Public Defender, Jeffrey C. Corey, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Alexandria, Virginia, Keith Loren Kimball, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee Mohamed Ali Said; Robert B. Rigney, Protogyrou & Rigney, PLC, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee Mohamed Abdi Jama; Bruce C. Sams, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee Abdicasiis Cabaase; Trey R. Kelleter, Vandeventer Black, LLP, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee Abdi Razaq Abshir Osman; David M. Good, David Michael Good, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee Mohamed Farah.
Before KING, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Judge KING wrote the opinion, in which Judge DAVIS and Judge KEENAN joined.
The government appeals from the district court's published opinion and order of August 17, 2010, granting the joint pretrial motion of the five defendants-appellees—Mohamed Ali Said, Mohamed Abdi Jama, Abdicasiis Cabaase, Abdi Razaq Abshir Osman, and Mohamed Farah—to dismiss the 18 U.S.C. § 1651 piracy count from the eight-count superseding indictment brought against them. See United States v. Said, 757 F.Supp.2d 554 (E.D.Va.2010). 1 The defendants were charged with piracy under § 1651 for attacking, but not seizing or otherwise robbing, a United States Navy ship. See id. at 556–57 (). The district court's ruling dismissed the piracy count from the indictment, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12, because no taking of property was alleged. Id. at 556.
We heard oral argument in the government's interlocutory appeal from the Said opinion on March 25, 2011, and that same day ordered the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the legal propriety of the procedure employed by the district court to dismiss the piracy count from the indictment. Thereafter, on April 20, 2011, we placed this appeal in abeyance pending our decision in United States v. Dire, 680...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Said v. United States
...Eighth Amendment Order, vacated the defendants' sentences, and remanded for resentencing. ECF Nos. 342, 343; see also United States v. Said, 680 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2012). On September 9, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Petitioner's Writ for Certiorari. ECF No. 351. On November 7, 2016, ......
-
United States v. Dire
...decision, we are issuing a per curiam opinion vacating the Said opinion and remanding for further proceedings. See United States v. Said, 680 F.3d 374 (4th Cir.2012). 6. The Latin term “ animo furandi ” means “with intention to steal.” Black's Law Dictionary 87 (6th ed.1990). 7. In concludi......
-
United States v. Ali
...district court in United States v. Said, 757 F.Supp.2d 554 (E.D.Va.2010), which the Fourth Circuit rejected. See United States v. Said, 680 F.3d 374 (4th Cir.2012) (per curiam) (reversing and remanding in light of Dire ), rev'g757 F.Supp.2d 554. 17. Traditionally, it was agreed that the hig......
-
United States v. Said
...States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an opinion vacating the Court's dismissal of the piracy count. United States v. Said, 680 F.3d 374 (4th Cir.2012). See also United States v. Dire, 680 F.3d 446, 465 (4th Cir.2012) (upholding an instruction to the jury that the crime of p......
-
Maritime Piracy: Changes in U.s. Law Needed to Combat This Critical National Security Concern
...an attempted attack by pirates on the USS Nicholas); United States v. Said, 757 F. Supp. 2d 554 (E.D. Va. 2010), vacated and remanded, 680 F.3d 374 (2012) (discussing an attempted attack by pirates on the USS Ashland). 77. See Hasan, 747 F. Supp. 2d at 601; Said, 757 F. Supp. 2d. at 557. 78......
-
Combating Somali pirates: Fourth Circuit casts warning by holding piracy includes failed attempts.
...defendants' actions could satisfy elements of piracy). But see United States v. Said, 757 F. Supp. 2d 554, 556 (E.D. Va. 2010), vacated, 680 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2012) (granting defendants' pre-trial motion to dismiss because no property was seized). The facts of the Said case are nearly iden......
-
You're a Crook, Captain Hook! Navigating a Way Out of the Somali Piracy Problem With the Rule of Law
...A Duel Over Definitions, Wall St. J., Aug. 20, 2010, at W1.2. United States v. Said, 757 F. Supp. 2d 554, 556 (E.D. Va. 2010), vacated, 680 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2012) (granting defendants' motion to dismiss the charges of piracy).3. Id. at 556-57.4. Douglas Guilfoyle, Prosecuting Pirates in N......