To the extent that such forfeitures and related preconviction restraints on transfer are authorized by provisions of the Comprehensive Forfeiture Act of 1984, those provisions violate an accused's right to counsel of choice as secured by the sixth amendment. In so holding, the court repudiated the prevailing view among district courts that Congress never intended the act's forfeiture provisions to apply to legitimate attorney fees. The court also rejected arguments that the act violates an accused's basic sixth amendment right 'not to be denied any counsel' or the 'discrete right to the effective assistance of counsel.' This note suggests that the court's holding in 'Harvey' is more narrowly drawn than necessary and that consequently criminal defense attorney fees may now be more vulnerable to forfeiture. A stronger constitutional argument for exempting attorney fees could have been made by relying additionally on the sixth amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, and there is ample justification for a statutory interpretation giving trial courts the discretion to exempt attorney fees from forfeiture before conviction. 79 footnotes.