Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

United States v. Kozeny

United States v. Kozeny

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York

April 28, 2011, Decided; April 29, 2011, Filed

05 CR 518 (SAS)

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER

SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, U.S.D.J.:

Landlocked Shipping Company ("Landlocked") and Dr. Jitka Chvatik (collectively, the "Petitioners") filed a petition 1 seeking immediate termination of a restraining order issued on February 13, 2009. 2 Alternatively, Petitioners request that the Restraining Order be terminated if and when the Privy Council denies the Government's appeal for the extradition of defendant Victor Kozeny. 3 If Kozeny is extradited from the Bahamas, Petitioners request that a pre-trial hearing be held shortly thereafter to determine Petitioners' ownership of certain funds. 4 The Government opposes the Petition on the ground that Petitioners are statutorily barred from intervening in the criminal case against Kozeny. For the following reasons, the Petition is denied without prejudice.

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Indictment

On May 12, 2005, a grand jury returned a twenty-seven count sealed indictment against Kozeny (the "Indictment"), which charged him with: conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1 et seq. (Count One); violating the FCPA (Counts Two through Thirteen); violating the Travel Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1952 (Counts Fourteen through Seventeen and Nineteen through Twenty); conspiracy to commit money laundering (Count Twenty-One); and money laundering (Counts Twenty-Two through Twenty-Five). 5 The Indictment also contains a forfeiture allegation in connection with property involved in or traceable to the money laundering offenses, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982, which seeks forfeiture of Kozeny's interest in any and all right, title, and interest in the proceeds of the sale of Peak House, its appurtenances, and certain personalty and furnishings located therein (the "Peak House Funds"). 6

At the time the Indictment was filed, Kozeny was residing in the Bahamas where he has been living since September 2000. The Government therefore attempted to extradite Kozeny to the United States. A provisional warrant was issued for Kozeny's arrest and he was taken into custody by the Bahamian authorities on October 5, 2005. The Indictment was then unsealed. Kozeny was held in custody at a prison in the Bahamas while he resisted extradition. In September 2006, the presiding Magistrate in the Bahamas granted the Government's request for extradition. Kozeny challenged the Magistrate's decision which was reversed, in October 2007, by an Order of the Supreme Court of the Bahamas. Kozeny was then released from custody. The Order of the Supreme Court was affirmed by the Court of Appeal of the Bahamas. The Government then sought leave to appeal to the Privy Council in the United Kingdom, which is the court of last resort for appeals in the Bahamas. On December 17, 2010, special  [*5] leave to appeal was granted by the Privy Council. 7

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46742 *; 2011 WL 1672473

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - against - VICTOR KOZENY, Defendant.

Prior History: United States v. Kozeny, 664 F. Supp. 2d 369, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95233 (S.D.N.Y., 2009)

CORE TERMS

forfeiture, Funds, restraining order, third party, extradition, Indictment, Claimants, subject to forfeiture, forfeitable, restrained, terminated, ownership, preliminary order, civil forfeiture, criminal case