This one is no easy read.
In United States v. Valdez, --- F.3d ---, No. 17-10446 (9th Cir. 2018), the Court affirmed the district court's order that the defendant forfeit substitute property in the form of a money judgment.
The defendant pleaded guilty to attempted smuggling of
ammunition from the United States into Mexico. At the time of her arrest, however, the ammunition was long gone. So, the government asked the district court for an order forfeiting substitute property, specifically money equal to the value of the ammunition. The district court agreed.
The appeal focused on whether the court could order forfeiture of substitute property in these circumstance. The Ninth Circuit concluded it could, but getting there involved a complicated analysis of a variety of forfeiture statutes.
Here's the point: The government can seek criminal forfeiture of substitute property when the defendant’s acts and omissions caused the unavailability of the original property subject to forfeiture.
