McIntosh v. United States
In brief
Missing the preliminary-order deadline does not automatically invalidate a criminal forfeiture order entered at sentencing.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 9-0 · April 17, 2024 · Opinion by Justice Sotomayor
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court unanimously held that a district court does not lose its power to order criminal forfeiture at sentencing merely because it failed to enter the required preliminary forfeiture order before sentencing under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2.
- Who it affects
- A missed deadline alone will not prevent forfeiture of property in a criminal case. Defendants may still seek appellate review of the error, including whether it was harmless.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court ruled for the United States, treating the deadline as a timing instruction rather than an absolute bar, while allowing appellate courts to review the error for harmlessness.
The decision treats Rule 32.2's preliminary-forfeiture deadline as a timing instruction, not an absolute limit on a court's power.
Question presented
May a district court enter a criminal forfeiture order when the time limit specified in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure has already passed?
What the Court decided
Holding
A district court’s failure to comply with Rule 32.2(b)(2)(B)’s requirement to enter a preliminary order before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review. 58 F. 4th 606, affirmed.
- Result
- Affirmed
The vote
From the opinions
“A district court’s failure to comply with Rule 32.2(b)(2)(B)’s requirement to enter a preliminary order before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.”
What's next
Lower courts may continue to enter forfeiture orders at sentencing after a missed preliminary-order deadline. Appeals courts can review whether the timing error was harmless.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Show 6 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Opinion added: McIntosh
Opinion added: opinion
Brief added: Petition
Brief added: Questions Presented
More questions
- What did the Supreme Court rule in McIntosh v. United States?
- The Court said a judge can order criminal forfeiture at sentencing despite missing the deadline for a preliminary forfeiture order.
- Who won McIntosh v. United States?
- The United States won. The Court unanimously affirmed the Second Circuit's decision.
- How does McIntosh affect criminal defendants?
- A missed Rule 32.2 deadline will not automatically defeat forfeiture. Defendants can still challenge whether the error caused harm on appeal.
- Is Rule 32.2 still the law after McIntosh?
- Yes. Courts must follow Rule 32.2, but missing its preliminary-order deadline does not remove a judge's power to order forfeiture at sentencing.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.