Honeycutt v. United States

Docket No.	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
16-142	Mar 29, 2017	May 6, 2017	8-0	Sotomayor	OT 2016

Holding: Because forfeiture pursuant to Section 853(a)(1) of the Comprehensive Forfeiture Act of 1984 is limited to property the defendant himself actually acquired as the result of the crime, that provision does not permit forfeiture with regard to Terry Honeycutt, who had no ownership interest in his brother's store and did not personally benefit from the illegal sales.

Judgment: Reversed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on May 6, 2017. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Opinion analysis: No joint and several liability for federal conspiracy forfeitures (Rory Little, June 6, 2017)
Argument analysis: A seemingly unanimous and unsurprising view that the statutory term obtained limits forfeiture (Rory Little, March 30, 2017)
Argument preview: Can a conspiracy defendant be ordered to forfeit proceeds he never obtained? (Rory Little, March 22, 2017)
Justices add drug forfeiture case to merits docket (Amy Howe, December 9, 2016)
Petition of the day (Kate Howard, August 25, 2016)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
07/29/2016	Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 31, 2016)
08/24/2016	Order extending time to file response to petition to and including September 30, 2016.
09/19/2016	Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including October 31, 2016.
10/31/2016	Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
11/14/2016	Reply of petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt filed.
11/15/2016	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 2, 2016.
12/05/2016	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 9, 2016.
12/09/2016	Petition GRANTED.
12/22/2016	Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.
12/30/2016	Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt.
01/09/2017	Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondent.
01/23/2017	Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.
01/23/2017	Brief of petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt filed.
01/30/2017	Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
02/03/2017	SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, March 29, 2017
02/06/2017	Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.
02/07/2017	Record received from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit. The record is electronic and available on PACER. One restricted document also received.
02/22/2017	CIRCULATED.
02/22/2017	Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
03/20/2017	Reply of petitioner Terry Michael Honeycutt filed. (Distributed)
03/29/2017	Argued. For petitioner: Adam G. Unikowsky, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Brian H. Fletcher, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
06/05/2017	Judgment REVERSED. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Gorsuch, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
07/07/2017	JUDGMENT ISSUED.