In the Courts

On Oct. 9, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued two opinions in United States v. Peters. See United States v. Peters, 732 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2013); United States v. Peters, —Fed.Appx.—, 2013 WL 5540075 (2d Cir. Oct. 9, 2013). The published opinion provided further insight into the Second Circuit's views on application of 18 U.S.C. ' 982(a)(2), a criminal forfeiture statute requiring forfeiture of the proceeds relating to certain criminal violations, including banking and securities-related offenses. The court held that the statute required forfeiture of all gross receipts rather than merely profits of a violation.

The defendant, Frank E. Peters, was convicted on various counts relating to a scheme to defraud Chase Manhattan Bank by overvaluing assets used to maintain a revolving line of credit. 732 F.3d at 95. Peters was sentenced to nine years in prison and ordered to pay $11,988,501.36 in restitution as well as to forfeit $23,154,259, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ' 982(a)(2). Id. On appeal, Peters challenged his conviction, arguing that the indictment was duplicitous, lodging various evidentiary challenges and challenging the district court's forfeiture calculation. Id.