Judges may determine that a criminal forfeiture violates the Eight Amendment's excessive fines clause by considering whether it deprives the defendant of the future ability to earn a living.
United States v. Voloski, 2016BL 43826, 2d Cir., No. 14-4176-cr, 2/17/16
The Second Circuit ruled that judges may consider that a criminal forfeiture is too harsh by determining whether it would deprive the defendant of the future ability to earn a living.
In United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321 (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that "a punitive forfeiture violates the Excessive Fines Clause if it is grossly disproportional to the gravity of the defendant's offense." They gave four factors to make this determination:
- the essence of the crime and its connection to other criminal activity;
- whether the defendant is in the class of persons at whom the statute was principally aimed;
- the maximum sentence and fine that could have been imposed; and
- the nature of the harm caused by the conduct.
- "a fine should not be so oppressive as to deprive a wrongdoer of his livelihood."
http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/United_States_v_Viloski_No_144176cr_2016_BL_43826_2d_Cir_Feb_17_2
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.