Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals court hears challenge to scope of money‑laundering forfeiture in Commonwealth's seizure case
Summary
In oral argument, appellants told a three‑judge panel the Commonwealth failed to show that assets beyond $106,000 were ‘obtained directly’ through money‑laundering and thus were not forfeitable; the panel questioned whether Massachusetts law requires a more direct tracing than federal precedents allow.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court heard arguments on Nov. 17 in Commonwealth v. $85,200 and other assets (2025P160), a dispute over how far the state's money‑laundering forfeiture law reaches.
Attorney Matt Thompson, representing interveners Robert and Andrea Patrino, told the panel the petition below alleged only $106,000 in stolen jewelry and that “the Commonwealth did not meet its burden” to show any additional funds were “obtained directly as a result of a money‑laundering transaction.” He urged the court to read the statutory phrase to require a direct tracing nexus rather than allowing broad substitution of defendants’ assets based on criminal history…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
