Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Alexander v. United States case brief

Alexander v. United States case brief summary
509 U.S. 544 (1993)


CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioner criminal filed an application for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit to challenge the district court's forfeiture of his adult entertainment business as punishment for violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

CASE FACTS
Petitioner criminal was convicted of violating obscenity laws and of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. In addition to a prison term, the district court ordered petitioner to forfeit certain assets that were directly related to his racketeering activity. Petitioner challenged the forfeiture, arguing that it violated U.S. Constitutional Amendment I because the forfeiture effectively shut down his adult entertainment business and constituted a complete ban on his future expression of free speech. Petitioner also argued that the forfeiture violated U.S. Constitutional Amendment VIII as an excessive form of punishment.

DISCUSSION
  • The court held that the forfeiture did not constitute a "prior restraint" under U.S. Constitutional Amendment I because it did not forbid petitioner from engaging in any expressive activities in the future. 
  • The court found, however, that the appellate court failed to determine whether the forfeiture was excessive under U.S. Constitutional amend VIII. 
  • Thus, the court rejected the claim under U.S. Constitutional Amendment I, vacated the judgment, and remanded the claim for a determination of whether the penalty was excessive under U.S. Constitutional Amendment VIII.
CONCLUSION
The court vacated and remanded the appellate court's affirmance of the district court's forfeiture penalty against petitioner criminal for violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The court held that although the forfeiture of petitioner's adult entertainment business did not violate U.S. Constitutional amend I as a prior restraint, a determination of whether the penalty was excessive was needed.



Suggested Study Aids and Books

No comments:

Post a Comment

Montana Cannabis Industry Association v. Montana Case Brief: Key Takeaways for Law Students and Legal Researchers

Case Brief: Montana Cannabis Industry Association v. Montana, 368 P.3d 1131 (Mont. 2016) Court Supreme Court of Montana Citation 368 P.3d 11...