United States First Circuit

District court grant of motion by the government to forfeit substitute assets belong to defendant that were already in the government's possession but had not been specifically named in any prior forfeiture order is affirmed where: 1) defendant had no constitutional right to appointed counsel under the Fifth or Sixth Amendment to defend against the government's attempt to forfeit the substitute assets; 2) the property in question may be forfeited as substitute property under 18 U.S.C. sec. 1963(m) as it was not yet forfeited and there was still an unfulfilled judgment against defendant; and 3) there is no constitutional right in criminal forfeiture proceedings that factual predicates for a substitute asset forfeiture be found by a jury and not by a court.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/29/2009
• Published 04/29/2009

Judges

• BOUDIN, Circuit Judge., Before BOUDIN, JOHN R. GIBSON, and HOWARD, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Mark E. Overland, by appointment of the court, with whom Overland Borenstein Scheper & Kim LLP, was on brief, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Donald C. Lockhart, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Robert Clark Corrente, United States Attorney, was on brief, for appellee.