McIntosh v. United States
Decided April 17, 2024. Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court.
Docket 22-7386 · 601 U.S. 330 (2024) · Cited 16 times
Holding
A district court’s failure to comply with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(b)(2)(B)’s requirement to enter a preliminary order imposing criminal forfeiture before sentencing does not bar a judge from ordering forfeiture at sentencing subject to harmless-error principles on appellate review.
The Court’s statement of the holding, from the opinion’s syllabus. The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. Read the official opinion for authority.
How the Justices voted
Decided 9–0.
Majority · 9
“Concurring” means agreeing with the outcome; any split shown is the Court’s judgment, not each Justice’s reasoning. The lineup is the syllabus’s disposition of who wrote and joined each opinion. Source: the opinion’s syllabus (supremecourt.gov).
Precedents cited
Supreme Court decisions this opinion relies on, ordered by how often it cites each. Cases in our collection link through; others are named.
- United States v. James Daniel Good Real Property · 510 U.S. 43 (1993)
- Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co. · 537 U.S. 149 (2003)
- Eberhart v. United States · 546 U.S. 12 (2005)
- Regions Hospital v. Shalala · 522 U.S. 448 (1998)
- Santos-Zacaria v. Garland · 598 U.S. 411 (2023)
- Brock v. Pierce County · 476 U.S. 253 (1986)
- United States v. Montalvo-Murillo · 495 U.S. 711 (1990)
- Sebelius v. Auburn Regional Medical Center · 568 U.S. 145 (2013)
Official text
Read the official opinion (PDF, supremecourt.gov)
Explore from here
Sonia Sotomayor’s profile · All Supreme Court opinions · The Supreme Court
Source: Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinions (2024). Citation count from the Free Law Project’s CourtListener bulk data. Data last verified 2026-08-15. Informational only; verify against the primary source before relying. Not a consumer report (FCRA).