Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
_____________
____________________
William J. Brown for petitioner.
________________
Kevin O'Regan,
Assistant United States Attorney,
______________
Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, was on brief for
_______________
States.
____________________
____________________
____________________
with
the Uni
Per Curiam.
___________
a third count, a
subject
to
forfeit because
This
certiorari
unsuccessfully.1
U.S.C.
2255
used
to facilitate
intent to distribute.
court affirmed
although
and Gilberti
number
of
21
U.S.C.
chose not
to seek
co-defendants
Gilberti's
did
so
motion under 28
forfeiture.
In
a carefully
Gilberti's argument
is
two-fold: that
the
count,
forfeiture of
minimal
and that
the
connection
with
disproportionate penalty.
the
challenge a
course.
drug
transactions
and we follow
Connell, 6 F.3d
_______
on
is
chosen to by-
2255 is an appropriate
forfeiture judgment
United States v.
______________
house based
the
the forfeiture
means
the same
27, 29 n.3
(1st
Cir. 1993).
We agree
claim--that he
to
a separate
hearing on
the
____________________
1United States v. Innamorati, 996 F.2d 456, 473 (1st
______________
__________
Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 409, 459, 1072-73 (1993-
____
______
94).
-2-2-
foreclosed.
his trial
do so.
The
point is not
that error
See,
___
549, 557-58
(10th Cir.),
v. Jenkins,
_______
cert. denied,
____________
498
904
U.S. 962
(1990).
Gilberti's brief suggests that
counsel
to
move
ineffective
bifurcation
assistance.
for
have
no basis for
counsel could
may
amounted
to
this claim in
once; and,
We see
entire case at
later denials by
has recently
offered
held that
against forfeitures
an excessive
under
fines
the
defense may
Eighth
be
Amendment.2
residence valued
residence
for storage,
planning
and
transactions.
____________________
2Alexander v. United States, 113 S. Ct. 2766 (1993);
_________
______________
Austin v. United States, 113 S. Ct. 2801 (1993).
______
_____________
-3-3-
potential
-4-4-