Clients facing asset seizure or forfeiture in New York often need counsel before any criminal charge has been filed. Duncan Levin, a New York asset forfeiture lawyer and former Chief of Asset Forfeiture in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, represents individuals, families, executives, and businesses when the government freezes bank accounts, restrains securities, seizes property, or pursues civil or criminal forfeiture.
Asset restraint can become the government’s most powerful form of leverage. A bank account may be frozen before an arrest. Securities may be restricted or liquidated. Payment chains can collapse, and businesses can lose access to operating funds. These measures can create severe financial, tax, business, and reputational consequences long before a court adjudicates the underlying allegations.
Experience in Federal and New York Asset Forfeiture Matters
This practice is led by Duncan Levin, a former federal prosecutor and former Chief of Asset Forfeiture in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. His career has focused on financial investigations and the legal mechanisms through which money and property become evidence, potential proceeds, instrumentalities, or leverage in criminal and regulatory matters.
As Chief of Asset Forfeiture, Mr. Levin oversaw criminal and civil forfeiture and monetary recoveries across matters involving fraud, international corruption, organized crime, terrorist financing, narcotics prosecutions, identity theft, and other financial crimes. He supervised forfeiture matters arising from cases handled by more than 500 Manhattan Assistant District Attorneys and worked extensively with federal prosecutors, law-enforcement agencies, financial institutions, and government officials.
Mr. Levin also served as a federal prosecutor in the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, where he handled financial investigations, money laundering, and asset forfeiture matters. He now teaches asset forfeiture and money laundering as a Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School and Columbia Law School. This government, defense, and academic experience informs the firm’s approach to complex asset-restraint and forfeiture proceedings.
Civil, Criminal, and Administrative Asset Forfeiture
Asset forfeiture can proceed through several different legal mechanisms. Determining which process applies is often the first critical step because each has different notice requirements, filing deadlines, burdens of proof, and procedures for asserting ownership.
Criminal forfeiture
Criminal forfeiture is generally pursued as part of a prosecution against a person or company. The government may seek forfeiture of alleged proceeds, property used to facilitate an offense, or substitute assets where authorized by law. Restraining orders may be sought before trial to preserve property for possible forfeiture. The defense must therefore address both the criminal allegations and the government’s tracing, valuation, ownership, and nexus theories.
Civil judicial forfeiture
Civil forfeiture may proceed directly against property, even when the property owner has not been criminally charged. Federal civil forfeiture proceedings are generally governed by the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act and related statutes and rules. Potential issues include whether the property is sufficiently connected to alleged conduct, whether the government can trace the property, whether an innocent-owner defense applies, and whether the seizure and continued restraint comply with due-process requirements.
Administrative forfeiture
Certain federal agencies may begin forfeiture through an administrative process rather than an immediate court proceeding. The agency ordinarily sends notice to potential claimants, and the recipient must determine whether and how to submit a claim that moves the dispute into court. These notices can carry short and unforgiving deadlines. Failing to respond properly may result in the property being forfeited without a judicial determination of the merits.
New York forfeiture proceedings
New York civil forfeiture actions may be brought under Article 13-A of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. These proceedings can involve alleged proceeds of crime, substituted proceeds, or instrumentalities. They may also affect spouses, family members, businesses, investors, lienholders, and other people who were not charged with a crime but claim an ownership or financial interest in the targeted property.
Property That May Be Seized or Restrained
Asset-restraint and forfeiture matters may involve many different forms of property, including:
- Personal and business bank accounts
- Brokerage accounts, securities, and investment positions
- Cash and monetary instruments
- Homes, commercial real estate, and other real property
- Business interests, receivables, and operating funds
- Vehicles, jewelry, artwork, and other valuable personal property
- Digital assets and cryptocurrency
- Property held jointly or through companies, trusts, nominees, or family members
- Funds delayed or blocked by banks, payment processors, or correspondent institutions
Each category presents different questions involving title, control, valuation, tracing, liquidity, preservation, and the rights of third parties. A restraint involving securities, for example, may require attention not only to whether the government may restrain the account, but also to whether trading restrictions or forced liquidation could unnecessarily alter the portfolio, trigger taxes, or diminish the property’s value.
Emergency Response to Restraining Orders and Frozen Accounts
Early action is often essential when property has been seized or restrained. The first task is to identify what is actually causing the restriction. A freeze may result from a seizure warrant, restraining order, civil forfeiture complaint, grand-jury investigation, sanctions concern, anti-money-laundering review, bank compliance decision, or some combination of these events.
The appropriate response depends on the source of the restraint. A court-ordered freeze may require litigation, negotiation with prosecutors, or an application for limited relief. A bank-imposed restriction may instead require careful communication with the institution, source-of-funds documentation, ownership records, or coordination with sanctions and compliance counsel. When an OFAC or sanctions issue is involved, the firm coordinates the asset strategy with its OFAC and sanctions practice.
How Levin & Associates Handles Asset Forfeiture Matters
- Emergency assessment of seizures, restraining orders, frozen accounts, and applicable deadlines
- Representation in federal and New York civil and criminal forfeiture proceedings
- Responses to administrative-forfeiture notices and preparation of claims
- Challenges to alleged proceeds, facilitation, tracing, commingling, and substitute-asset theories
- Applications to modify restraints and obtain access to funds where legally available
- Analysis of ownership, title, control, and competing property interests
- Third-party petitions and innocent-owner claims
- Coordination of forfeiture strategy with related white-collar defense, criminal, regulatory, and civil proceedings
- Bank-facing documentation and advocacy concerning frozen funds, de-risking, and loss of financial access
- Cross-border matters involving foreign property, counterparties, correspondent banking, and international enforcement
- Preservation and valuation strategies for securities, businesses, real estate, digital assets, and other property
Third-Party and Innocent-Owner Claims
Forfeiture proceedings frequently affect people and entities other than the government’s principal target. A spouse, family member, investor, lender, business partner, trust, or company may have a legitimate interest in restrained property. That person may need to establish the nature and timing of the interest, the consideration paid, the source of the property, and the absence of knowledge or involvement in the alleged conduct.
These claims require careful factual development. Deeds, account records, contracts, tax documents, loan records, corporate books, communications, and evidence showing the source and intended use of funds may all become important. The firm works to identify the governing procedure, document the claimant’s interest, and prevent the government’s allegations against one person from automatically consuming property belonging to someone else.
Coordinating Forfeiture With Criminal and Regulatory Defense
Asset forfeiture rarely exists in isolation. The same facts may generate a criminal investigation, regulatory inquiry, sanctions review, tax issue, civil lawsuit, internal investigation, or reputational crisis. Statements made to recover property can affect the larger case, while decisions in the criminal matter can affect ownership and forfeiture claims.
Levin & Associates approaches these proceedings as part of a coordinated strategy. The firm evaluates how property claims, factual submissions, witness interviews, financial records, and negotiations may affect parallel exposure. That allows clients to pursue access to property without losing sight of the broader legal and strategic consequences.
Frequently Asked Questions About Asset Forfeiture
Can the government freeze assets before filing criminal charges?
In some circumstances, yes. Federal and New York law may permit the government to seek seizure warrants, restraining orders, or other provisional remedies before a criminal case has been resolved—and sometimes before charges have been publicly filed. Whether the restraint is lawful and what relief may be available depend on the governing statute, the order, the alleged connection between the property and the conduct, and the procedural posture.
What is the difference between seizure and forfeiture?
Seizure generally refers to the government taking possession or control of property. Restraint may prevent property from being transferred, withdrawn, traded, or dissipated without necessarily transferring possession. Forfeiture is the legal process through which ownership of the property is ultimately transferred to the government. A seizure or restraint does not always mean that forfeiture is inevitable.
What should I do after receiving an administrative-forfeiture notice?
Review it immediately. Administrative-forfeiture notices ordinarily identify the property, the seizing agency, and a deadline for submitting a claim or other response. The proper course depends on the circumstances, but missing the deadline may result in forfeiture without a court reaching the merits of the ownership dispute.
Can a spouse, business, or other third party challenge forfeiture?
Potentially. A third party may be able to assert an ownership interest, lien, innocent-owner defense, or other claim depending on the proceeding and applicable law. The claimant will generally need evidence establishing the nature, timing, and legitimacy of the interest in the property.
Can a bank freeze an account without a forfeiture order?
A bank may restrict or terminate an account for reasons separate from a government forfeiture case, including perceived fraud, sanctions, anti-money-laundering, source-of-funds, or compliance risk. Determining whether the restriction resulted from legal process, a government inquiry, or the bank’s own risk decision is essential to selecting the appropriate response.
Why does early legal review matter?
Forfeiture and seizure proceedings often involve strict deadlines, rapidly developing parallel investigations, and property that may lose value while restrained. Early review can help preserve claims, identify the controlling process, protect records, assess ownership and tracing issues, and avoid statements or actions that could create problems in a related criminal or regulatory matter.
Contact a New York Asset Forfeiture Lawyer
Asset seizure, forfeiture, and frozen-funds matters require prompt, coordinated attention. Levin & Associates represents clients facing federal and New York asset restraint, civil and criminal forfeiture, administrative seizure, third-party ownership disputes, and related financial-access problems. Contact the firm to discuss the circumstances confidentially and determine the appropriate next steps.