Skip to main content

2019 Investigative Summary 7


In litigation over the government’s seizure of property in anticipation of civil and criminal forfeiture, the court criticized an Assistant U.S. Attorney for submitting a filing that contained inaccurate statements about the status of certain forfeiture proceedings.  Following an investigation, OPR concluded that the prosecutor did not commit professional misconduct in making the criticized statements.  OPR found that several statements were inaccurate, as the prosecutor acknowledged, but that she did not intend to mislead either the court or the opposing party. 

OPR concluded, rather, that in making the inaccurate statements the prosecutor exercised poor judgment.  Her failure to be scrupulously accurate in describing forfeiture law and procedure was particularly notable because of her expertise in the subject and the court’s consequent reliance on her knowledge.  In this failure, the prosecutor acted in marked contrast to the action that the Department reasonably expects an attorney exercising good judgment to take.

Updated July 13, 2021