Libretti v. United States

Summary

The Court, in an opinion by Justice O'Connor, held that Rule 11(f) does not require a factual-basis inquiry for a stipulated criminal forfeiture because forfeiture is punishment rather than a substantive offense. It also held that the jury right under Rule 31(e) is statutory, not constitutional, and that Libretti validly waived it without specific judicial advice or an express written waiver addressing that rule. The Court found no error in the forfeiture order on the record presented and affirmed. Justice Souter separately concurred in part and in the judgment, declining to reach the constitutional questions and finding the general jury-trial advice sufficient. Justice Ginsburg separately concurred in part and in the judgment, requiring awareness of the forfeiture jury right but finding that pretrial statements supplied it here. Neither concurrence had a joiner. Justice Stevens dissented without a joiner: although agreeing that Rule 11(f) did not apply, he would vacate and remand because courts independently must ensure statutory authorization and the record did not support forfeiture of every asset.