Forfeiture and Seizure

The Second Circuit affirmed a jury verdict finding a medical billing company owner guilty of health care fraud, conspiracy, wire fraud, and aggravated identity theft, but vacated his 144-month sentence, $63.38 million forfeiture judgment, and $336.99 million restitution award. The Court held the district court procedurally erred by lengthening the prison term based on the prospect of First Step Act earned-time credits and RDAP benefits, misapplied two Guidelines enhancements without adequate findings, and used flawed methodologies for forfeiture and restitution.

In a matter of first impression, the Ninth Circuit vacated a defendant’s pre-trial repatriation order under a de novo standard of review after finding the order violated the defendant’s right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment. The Court further held that the district court’s application of the forgone conclusion exception was too broad while the government’s limited use immunity was too narrow to protect the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights.

In a case involving mail fraud and falsifying immigration forms, the Court held that the district court correctly applied the Guidelines for fraud under 2B1.1 rather than for falsifying immigration forms under 2L2.1, explaining that “the heart” of the defendant’s scheme was enriching themselves by cheating undocumented immigrants.

United States v. Frank Amodeo, Nos. 15-12643 & 16-15687 (February 21, 2019) The Court held that the defendant lacked standing to appeal a district court’s partial vacatur of the final forfeiture order in his case. The Court held that the defendant lost all of his rights in the forfeited property when the district court entered […]