Caplin & Drysdale v. United States
United States Supreme Court
491 U.S. 617 (1989)
After being indicted for a massive drug operation under 21 U.S.C. § 848, Reckmeyer was restrained from transferring assets sought for forfeiture, including funds he wanted to use to pay his law firm, Caplin & Drysdale (plaintiff); he ultimately pleaded guilty and agreed to forfeit nearly all his assets. Caplin & Drysdale petitioned for a share of the forfeited assets to cover its fees, arguing the forfeiture statute either exempted attorney's-fee assets or, if it didn't, that lacking such an exemption was unconstitutional; the district court awarded the firm some assets, but the court of appeals reversed.
Whether a drug forfeiture statute that does not include an exemption for assets used to pay attorney fees violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.