Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In Honeycutt v. United States, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that a federal criminal forfeiture statute permits joint and several liability for criminal asset forfeiture judgments, thereby protecting defendants who were only marginally culpable for a larger offense.
In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has demonstrated a renewed willingness to police the boundaries of the law of asset forfeiture in order to make sure that defendants are treated fairly. In Honeycutt v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1626 (2017), the Supreme Court rejected the argument that a federal criminal forfeiture statute permits joint and several liability for criminal asset forfeiture judgments, thereby protecting defendants who were only marginally culpable for a larger offense. One year prior, in Luis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1083 (2016), the Supreme Court held that pretrial restraint of legitimate, untainted assets violated the Sixth Amendment, when the government sought to secure the untainted property as substitute assets for eventual forfeiture or restitution. Last year, Justice Clarence Thomas even expressed an interest in the Court taking up the question of whether due process requires the government to prove its entitlement to civil forfeiture by clear and convincing evidence. Leonard v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 847 (2017) (Thomas, J., concurring).
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
DOJ’s Cyber Fraud Initiative: A Wake-up Call That Keeps Ringing
By Randy S. Grossman, Kareem A. Salem and Kayla LaRosa
DOJ’s Cyber Fraud Initiative has been a wake-up call for companies to prioritize cybersecurity and adhere to stringent standards. By leveraging the FCA, DOJ has used a powerful enforcement tool to target a wide range of cybersecurity failures and misrepresentations. The increasing focus on cybersecurity by enforcement agencies means that robust cybersecurity practices are becoming a standard expectation, not just a best practice.
The State of Supreme Court Jurisprudence On Public Corruption
By Carrie H. Cohen and Allison M. Magnarelli
In the past decade, each time the Supreme Court has taken certiorari in a public corruption case, the court has reversed trial convictions and limited the types of conduct that constitute a federal bribery offense.
Defending Against Extradition to the United States
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
The arm of U.S. extradition law is long. Fortunately, practitioners have defenses at their disposal that they may raise in the requested country’s courts to help either limit the scope of prosecution once extradition occurs, or to prevent it altogether.
New DOJ Self-Disclosure Pilot Program Increases Risk for Startups
By Jonathan Fahey, Jonathan P. Lienhard and Oliver Roberts
The DOJ has created new incentives for employee, or anyone, to report criminal misconduct allegedly committed by companies and their agents. Given their often laxer internal reporting structures and higher employee turnover rates, startup companies should pay particularly close attention to this new development to best mitigate legal risks.