S1026-94520000616-5-1

Article

Published

Issue 10

62-72

In the beginning of the article it is pointed out that in contradistinction to the Russian Federation, where forfeiture ofproperty was excluded from the system ofpenal punishments in 2003, in the United States over the last two decades forfeitures increased dramatically. Two types offorfeiture known to American criminal legislation - in civil (in rem) and criminal (in personam) proceeding - are considered. They are applied on the federal level and in the states as well. The main general statutes governing both types of forfeitures by the Federal criminal code (title 18 USC) are - articles 981 and 982 respectively. They are somewhat similar on the range of crimes (rather broad), for committing of which maybe applied and provide for confiscation of personal and real property. “Gross dispro- portionality” of the amount ofproperty being forfeited to the gravity of an offence, “substantial connection” between the property and the offense, double jeopardy and other questions are broached. It is noted that statutes of general character on forfeiture ofproperty in the legislation of states, with the exception of criminal code of Oregon and perhaps some others are found rarely. In many, for instance of California, Illinois, Florida and New York and another foresee a fragmentary or narrow regulation of questions concerning forfeiture. In conclusion the author expounds some considerations related to a possible restoration of forfeiture in the Russian Federation.

01.10.2014

1

1212