- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Lawyer Accuses Feds of Trying to Seize Crime Boss' Granddaughter's Inheritance
Federal prosecutors claim Miske purposefully overdosed to prevent asset forfeiture, but his estate says the government's theory is flawed.
Mar. 27, 2026 at 1:22am
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
An attorney representing the estate of the late Hawai'i crime boss Michael J. Miske Jr. is accusing federal prosecutors of trying to seize Miske's $20 million estate, which would deprive his 9-year-old granddaughter of her inheritance. Federal prosecutors argue that Miske purposefully overdosed on fentanyl he had smuggled into prison to prevent the government from seizing his assets, but the estate's lawyer says this "novel, unprecedented theory" is flawed and the time for asset forfeiture has expired.
Why it matters
This case highlights the complex legal battle over asset forfeiture, with the government seeking to seize the assets of a deceased crime boss, and the estate arguing that doing so would unfairly harm an innocent child. It raises questions about the limits of the government's power to confiscate property, even in cases involving alleged criminal activity.
The details
In July 2024, a jury found Miske guilty of 13 federal counts related to his operation of a criminal enterprise that engaged in drug trafficking, robberies and murder for hire. The government sought to seize his $20 million in properties, but when Miske died of a drug overdose in prison in December 2024, the forfeiture process was halted. Federal prosecutors now claim Miske conspired with other inmates to have fentanyl smuggled into the facility, accusing him of obstruction of justice and interfering with the forfeiture proceeding. However, Miske's estate lawyer argues the government missed its legal deadline to seize the assets and that its new theory is flawed, as the properties were not obtained as a result of obstruction of justice.
- In July 2024, a jury found Miske guilty of 13 federal counts.
- In December 2024, Miske was found dead in his cell of a drug overdose at Honolulu's Federal Detention Center.
- In January 2025, federal prosecutors filed their forfeiture complaint.
The players
Michael J. Miske Jr.
A Hawai'i crime boss who was convicted of 13 federal counts related to his operation of a criminal enterprise.
Edward Burch
A San Francisco-based lawyer representing Miske's trust and estate.
Ken Sorenson
The U.S. Attorney who declined to comment on the pending litigation.
Caleb Miske
Miske's late son, whose daughter is the beneficiary of Miske's trust.
Delia Fabro-Miske
Caleb Miske's wife, who was charged with racketeering conspiracy for her role in the Miske enterprise and sentenced to seven years in federal prison.
What they’re saying
“We are vigorously opposing the government's attempt to advance a legal theory that no court in the country has ever recognized for good reason. It goes against the letter and spirit of the law.”
— Edward Burch, Attorney for Miske's trust
“The Trust did not receive these properties because Miske died; it continued to retain what it already held when the criminal forfeiture proceeding abated upon his death. Retaining pre-existing property is not obtaining proceeds.”
— Edward Burch, Attorney for Miske's trust
What’s next
The judge in the case will decide whether to allow the government to seize Miske's assets, which would deprive his 9-year-old granddaughter of her inheritance.
The takeaway
This case highlights the complex legal battles over asset forfeiture, with the government seeking to seize the assets of a deceased crime boss, and the estate arguing that doing so would unfairly harm an innocent child. It raises questions about the limits of the government's power to confiscate property, even in cases involving alleged criminal activity.



