Kaley v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kagan
*322 A federal statute, 21 U.S.C. § 853 (e), authorizes a court to freeze an indicted defendant's assets prior to trial if they would be subject to forfeiture upon conviction. In United States v. Monsanto, 491 U.S. 600 , 615, 109 S.Ct. 2657 , 105 L.Ed.2d 512 (1989), we approved the constitutionality of such an order so long as it is "based on a finding of probable cause to believe that the property will ultimately be proved forfeitable." And we held that standard to apply even when a defendant seeks to use the disputed property to pay for a lawyer.
In this case, two indicted defendants wishing to…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by476 opinions
- Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Honeycutt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- Omar Paez v. Claudia MulveyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2019
- Willie Ousley v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
471 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.