Legal Opinion · Dissent

Peithman v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided November 18, 2019No. 19-16Relating-toCited by 4 opinions

1DissentJustice Sotomayor

In Honeycutt v. United States , 581 U. S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 1626 , 198 L.Ed.2d 73 (2017), this Court held that joint-and-several liability is not permitted under 98 Stat. 2045 , 21 U.S.C. § 853 (a)(1), which mandates forfeiture of "property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of " certain drug crimes. 581 U. S., at ----, 137 S.Ct., at 1630 . The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has since held that the reasoning of Honeycutt "appl[ies] with equal force" to 18 U.S.C. § 981 (a)(1)(C), which is worded almost identically to 21…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Honeycutt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
  2. United States v. Ylli GjeliCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
  3. United States v. Allen Peithman, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Vassily ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
  2. PacNet Services Ltd. v. United States Department of the TreasuryDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2021
  3. United States v. EliasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2025
  4. United States v. Starsha LimbaughCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2023

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API