United States Second Circuit

Denial of motion to intervene to contest a portion of the forfeiture order that was included in criminal defendant's sentence is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court exceeded its statutory forfeiture authority by including an untainted portion of the proceeds of a stock sale in the forfeited property; and 2) to the extent that 21 U.S.C. section 853(n) ancillary proceedings provide the exclusive means for movant to pursue its interest in the proceeds of the stock sale, the statute violates the Due Process Clause.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/02/2007
• Published 08/02/2007

Judges

• SACK, Circuit Judge., Before:  McLAUGHLIN and SACK, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF, District Judge .

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• David J. Monz, Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. (Barbara A. Frederick, of counsel), Hartford, CT, for Movant-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Barbara A. Ward, Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York (Michael J. Garcia, United States Attorney, and Katherine Polk Failla, Assistant United States Attorney, of counsel), New York, NY, for Plaintiff-Appellee., John Gueli, Shearman & Sterling LLP (Stuart J. Baskin and Ladan F. Stewart, of counsel), New York, NY, for Interested-Party-Appellees Merrill Lynch & Co. and Merrill Lynch Capital Services, Inc.