- 12 -
Interco, Inc., 719 F.2d 23, 28 (2d Cir. 1983) (stating that it is
not inconsistent with the discretion standard for an appellate
court to decline to honor a purported exercise of discretion
which was infected by an error of law); Swanson v. Commissioner,
121 T.C. 111, 119 (2003).
B. Criminal Forfeiture
Title 18 U.S.C. sec. 982, is entitled “Criminal forfeiture”,
and it governs forfeiture in cases involving convictions for
money laundering. In pertinent part, 18 U.S.C. sec. 982(a)(1)
provides:
Sec. 982 Criminal Forfeiture.
(a)(1) The court, in imposing sentence on a person
convicted of an offense in violation of * * * [18
U.S.C. secs. 1956 or 1957] shall order that the person
forfeit to the United States any property, real or
personal, involved in such offense, or any property
traceable to such property.
The seizure of property forfeited under 18 U.S.C. sec.
982(a)(1) and any judicial proceeding relating to the forfeiture
are governed by 21 U.S.C. sec. 853 (2000) (except subsection (d)
thereof). 18 U.S.C. sec. 982(b)(1). Title 21, U.S.C. sec.
853(c), addresses third party transfers and provides as follows:
Sec. 853(c). Third party transfers.
All right, title, and interest in property
described in * * * [18 U.S.C. sec. 982] vests in the
United States upon the commission of the act giving
rise to forfeiture under * * * [18 U.S.C. sec. 982].
Any such property that is subsequently transferred to a
person other than the defendant may be the subject of a
special verdict of forfeiture and thereafter shall be
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011