### F I LE D U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E LEVE NTH CI RCUI T Se pt e m be r 6, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN C L E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 11809 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 2 0 3 2 4 - C V- J AL J O E H A R R Y P E G G , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 6, 2005) B efo re C A RN E S , M A R C U S an d K R A V IT C H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: Joe H arry P egg, a f

eder al pri soner procee di ng pro se, appeal s the di stri ctAlthough it does not a ppear that Peg gfiled a dire ct appe al of his conviction or the 1 fo rf e itureorder, Pe g gdid

fi lean uns uc c e ssf

ul m oti on to v a c atehis sentenc eun der 2 8 U .S. C. § 2255, and he c ontinued to challeng e the f orfe iture in the Middle District of F lorida. 2 c our t ’ s gr a ntof

the gove r nm e nt ’ s m ot i on t o di s m i s s P e gg’ s a c t i on f orthe r e tur n of f o r f e ite d p r o p e r ty , b r o u g h t p u r s u a n t to F e d e r a l R u le o f C r im in a l P r o c e d u r e 4 1 ( g ) . We a f f i r m th e d i s tr i c tc o u r t ’ s d e c i s i o n f o rth e r e a s o n s s e tf

o r th b e l o w. I. P egg w as i nd i ct ed i n the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rtfor the M i dd l e D i stri ct of F l ori da for drug-rel at ed offens es and t he i nd i ctm entcont ai ned a forfe i ture p r o v is io n p u r s u a n t to 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 5 3 . I n N o v e m b e r1 9 9 4 , P e g g p le a d e d g u ilty to one c ountof

the i ndi c tm e nt , a nd on F e brua r y 16, 1996, he w a s s e nt e nc e d t o 360 m onths i m pr i s onm e ntunde rthe t e r m s of the pl e a a gr e e m e nt . D ur i ng s e nt e nc i ng, th e c o u r ta d d r e s s e d th e f o r f e i tu r e i s s u e , b u td e c l i n e d t o e n t e ra n o r d e ra tth a tt i me be c a us e P e gg’ s c ouns e l r e que s t e d a ddi t i ona l t i m e t o f i l e a r e s pons e t o the gove r nm e nt ’ s f

or f e i tur e m ot i on. O n M a r c h 29, 1996, the M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l ori da ent er ed a prel i m i nary order of forf ei ture und er21 U . S . C . § 8 53 and F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 32 (b)( 2). 1 I n F e brua r y 2005, P e gg f i l e d the i ns t a ntR ul e 41( g) m ot i on f orr e tur n of p r o p e r ty in th e U n ite d S ta te s D is tr ic t C o u r t f o rth e S o u th e r n D is tr ic t o f F lo r id a . T he di s tr i c tc our tgr a nt e d the gove r nm e nt ’ s m ot i on t o di s m i s s f orl a c k of3

ju r is d ic tio n . P e g g n o w ap p e a ls . II . W e r evi ew de no vo a di stri ctcourt ’ s deni al of a R ul e 41(g) m ot i on for r eturn o f p r o p e r ty . U

ni t ed Stat es v. P ot es -R am i rez , 26 0 F . 3d 13 10 , 13 14 n. 8 (11 th C i r. 2 0 0 1 ) . Q u e s tio n s o f

s u b je c t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n a r e a ls o r e v ie w e d d e n o v o . U ni t ed S ta te s v . P e tr ie , 30 2 F . 3d 12 80 , 12 84 (11t h C i r. 20 02 ). F e de r a l R ul e of

C r i m i na l P r oc e dur e 41( g) pr ovi de s tha t“ [ a ] pe r s on a ggr i e ve d by a n unl a w f ul s e a r c h a nd s e i z ur e of pr ope r ty orby the de pr i va t i on of pr ope r ty m a y m ove f

orthe pr ope r ty ’ s r e tur n. ” F e d. R . C r i m . P . 41( g) . R ul e 41( g) f u r th e rd ir e c ts th a t “[ t]h e m o tio n m u s t b e f ile d in th e d is tr ic t w h e r e th e p r o p e r ty w a s s e i z e d. ” I d. P e gg a r gue s tha tbe c a us e hi s pr ope r ty i s phy s i c a l l y l oc a t e d i n the S o u th e r n D is tr ic t o f

F lo r id a , it is p r o p e rf

o rh im to c h a lle n g e th e f o r f e itu r e o r d e rin thatdi stri ct . P egg’ s a rgum enti s m i spl ac ed. In the i nst antac t i on , the prop erty w as s e i z e d pur s ua ntt o a n or de rf r om the M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da . A l though the prop erty m ay ph ys i ca l l y l i e i n the S ou thern D i stri ctof F l ori da, a di stri ctcourthas j uri sdi ct i on t o ent erorders concerni ng forf ei t ed prop erty r egar dl es s of that pr ope r ty ’ s l oc a t i on. 21 U . S . C . § 853( l ) . T he pr ope rve nue f orthi s a c t i on, the r e f or e , i s the M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da . A c ontr a r y hol di ng w oul d r a i s e s e r i ous is s u e s o f ju d ic ia l e c o n o m y a n d c o m ity b e tw e e n th e f e d e r a l d is tr ic t c o u r ts .4

A llo w in g th e U n ite d S ta te s D is tr ic t C o u r t f o rth e S o u th e r n D is tr ic t o f F lo r id a to e n te r ta in th is c la im w o u ld e s s e n tia lly p u t it in th e p o s itio n o f r e v ie w in g th e M id d le D i stri ctof F l ori da’ s ori gi nal forf ei ture order. A c c or di ngl y , w e A F F I R M the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s di s m i s s a l of thi s a c t i on. AF F I R ME D.