Opinion

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
April 16, 2001
Hon. JOEL M. FLAUM, Chief Judge
Hon. KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge
Hon. ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ] Appeal from the United
Plaintiff-Appellee, ] States District Court for
] the Northern District of
No. 00-1869 v. ] Indiana, Hammond Division.
]
SHANTI BANKS-GIOMBETTI, also known ] No. 99 CR 62
as SHANTI GIOMBETTI, also known ]
as SHANTI BANKS, and also known as ] Rudy Lozano,
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS FORTE, ] Judge.
Defendant-Appellant. ]
]
The court, on its own motion, ORDERS that the March 30, 2001
opinion in the above-captioned appeal is AMENDED as follows:
On Page 4 of the Slip Opinion, the second paragraph after
“II” is replaced by the following:
The district court’s authority to assess costs
against criminal defendants such as Mr. Giombetti is
found in 28 U.S.C. § 1918(b) and Rule 57(b) of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Section 1918(b)
provides that district courts may in their discretion
assess the costs of prosecution against unsuccessful
criminal defendants in non-capital cases. See United
States v. Standiford, 148 F.3d 864, 870 n.4 (7th Cir.
1998); United States v. Hiland, 909 F.2d 1114, 1141
(8th Cir. 1990). The costs that may be assessed,
however, must be authorized by statute, United States
v. Gering, 716 F.2d 615, 626 (9th Cir. 1983); United
States v. Tzakis, 736 F.2d 867, 873 (2d Cir. 1984);
United States v. DeBrouse, 652 F.2d 383, 391 (4th Cir.
1981); United States v. Pommerening, 500 F.2d 92, 101
(10th Cir. 1974), and every court to address the issue

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-1869 Page 2
has held that, absent some other explicit statutory
authority, 28 U.S.C. § 1920 provides the costs of
prosecution that a court may assess under § 1918(b),
see Hiland, 909 F.2d at 1142; Gering, 716 F.2d at 626;
DeBrouse, 652 F.2d at 391; cf. United States v.
Stefonek, 179 F.3d 1030, 1037 (7th Cir. 1999) (section
1920 provides the exclusive list of “costs of
prosecution” that must be assessed against criminal
defendants in tax prosecutions under I.R.C. §§ 7202,
7206); Roadway Express Corp. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752,
759-60 (1980) (28 U.S.C. § 1927, allowing courts to
assess costs for vexatiously multiplying proceedings,
must be read in conjunction with § 1920); United States
v. Claros, 17 F.3d 1041, 1044-45 (7th Cir. 1994)
(same). Under § 1920, a court may tax as costs (1)
fees of the clerk and marshal; (2) fees of the court
reporter for transcripts; (3) fees for printing and
witnesses; (4) fees for exemplification and copies of
documents; (5) docket fees; and (6) compensation of
court-appointed experts and interpreters. Section 1920
does not list jury costs as a cost of prosecution.
Stefonek, 179 F.3d at 1037.

-- 2 of 2 --