Up A Newton MA

Main Menu

  • Conditional Sales Contract
  • Key Performance Indicators
  • Perfect Foresight
  • White-Collar Crime
  • Capital

Up A Newton MA

Header Banner

Up A Newton MA

  • Conditional Sales Contract
  • Key Performance Indicators
  • Perfect Foresight
  • White-Collar Crime
  • Capital
White-Collar Crime
Home›White-Collar Crime›Rare decision holding a forfeiture order to be constitutionally excessive may provide a roadmap for future challenges

Rare decision holding a forfeiture order to be constitutionally excessive may provide a roadmap for future challenges

By Mabel McCaw
December 3, 2021
0
0



While the United States Supreme Court has ruled that a “punitive” forfeiture order may constitute a constitutionally excessive fine “if it is manifestly disproportionate to the seriousness of a defendant’s offense,” United States v. Bajakajian, 524 US 321, 334 (1998) – and although the Second Circuit has since articulated various factors that courts must consider in assessing whether a forfeiture order is “grossly disproportionate”, United States v. Viloski, 814 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2016) – the defendants have historically failed to challenge an otherwise correctly calculated forfeiture order to be constitutionally excessive.

That may be about to change. In what appears to be a first, Justice Jed S. Rakoff issued an opinion this fall in which he (1) agreed that the government had discharged its onus of establishing a multimillion-dollar confiscation obligation under of the applicable law, but (2) by applying the Viloski Factors concluded that such an order would be “grossly disproportionate” to the defendant’s offense and therefore refused to enter into it. United States v. Akhavan, 2021 US Dist. LEXIS 16387, at * 3 (SDNY August 30, 2021). The decision – and the reasoning behind it – may provide a potential roadmap for defendants who view challenging forfeiture orders to be unconstitutionally excessive going forward. Indeed, the potential implications of Judge Rakoff’s decision are such that the government has already indicated its intention to file an extremely rare affirmative appeal.



Related posts:

  1. SF restaurant owner sentenced to 5-year program
  2. Representative Jeff Fortenberry Expects to be Charged with Lying to FBI But Says Charges False | Government-and-politics
  3. Troutman Pepper Nabs Mass. Attorney for White Collar Unit
  4. Trump organization, already indicted, faces new criminal investigation
Tagsunited states

Recent Posts

  • Imran Khan approaches Supreme Court over NAB Amendment Act
  • Flexible and Colored Polyurethane (Pu) Foam Market Outlook by 2031 – Designer Women
  • New York Adult-Use Retail Dispensary License Fortune Telling: Insights from DASNY RFP | Vicente Sederberg LLP
  • How CFOs can mobilize a company to achieve climate goals
  • Supreme Court strips us of Miranda warnings

Archives

  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019

Categories

  • Capital
  • Conditional Sales Contract
  • Key Performance Indicators
  • Perfect Foresight
  • White-Collar Crime
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy